UC~NRLF 


$B    17    7D7 


The 
Federal  Government  and  Education 


AN    EXAMINATION 

OF   THE    FEDERALIZATION    MOVEMENT 

IN  THE  LIGHT    OF    THE    EDUCATIONAL  DEMANDS 

OF  A    DEMOCRACY 


BY 

Robert  H.  Mahoney 

KNIGHTS  OF  COLUMBUS  SCHOLAR 


A  DISSERTATION 

Submitted  to  the  Faculty  of  Philosophy  oj  the  Catholic 

University  of  America  in  Partial  Fulfillment  of 

the  Requirements  for  the  Degree  of 

Doctor  of  Philosophy 


WASHINGTON,    D.    C, 

1922 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS^ 
CHAPTER  I 

INTRODUCTION 

Scope  of  Dissertation    1 

Problems  of  American  Education  2 

The   Reconstruction  Tendency  in  Education    3 

CHAPTER  n 

THE    CENTRALIZATION     MOVEMENT — AN     HISTORICAL    SURVEY     FROM 
REVOLUTIONARY  TIMES   TO  THE  PASSING  OF  THE   SMITH-HUGHES   ACT 

The   American    Fathers    and   Education    S 

Demand  for  a  National  Bureau  of  Education   7 

Agricultural  Education — The  Land  Grant  Colleges   9 

Vocational  Education  under  the  Smith-Hughes  Act   11 

CHAPTER  HI 

THE   CENTRALIZATION    MOVEMENT  AT  PRESENT — PENDING  LEGISLATION 

Number  of  Bills  in  the  66th  Congress   17 

Status  of  Bills  in  the  67th  Congress 17 

The  Kenyon  Bill  for  Americanization    18 

The  Fish  Bill  for  Americanization 23 

The  Fess  Bill  for  a  National  University  23 

The  Fletcher  Bill  for  a  National  Conservatory  of  Music 25 

The  Tillman  Bill  for  Mountain  Schools   26 

The  Raker  Bill  for  a  National  School  of  Correspondence   27 

The  Raker   Bill   for   Library   Information   Service    28 

The  Capper  Bill   for  Physical   Education    28 

The  Owen  Bill  for  a  Department  of  Education    31 

The  Husted  Resolution   for  the  Investigation  of   Public  Education..  32 

The  Kenyon  Bill  for  a  Department  of  Public  Welfare  ZZ 

CHAPTER  IV 

PENDING  LEGISLATION THE   STERLING  TOWNER   BILL,    S.    1252,    H,    R.    7 

Character  and  Inspiration  of  the  Sterling-Towner  Bill  35 

Provisions  of  the  Bill   38 

Revisions  Arising  from  Adverse  Criticism   40 

Arguments  in  Support  of  the  Bill  42 

Arguments  Against  the  Bill  48 


478677 


iv  Contents 

CHAPTER  V 

THE  RELATION  OF  THE  FEDERALIZATION    MOVEMENT  TO  DEMOCRACY 

The  Federalization  Tendency — Its  Philosophy 56 

The  Nature  of  Democracy  58 

Educational  Demands  of  Democracy 61 

Federal  Control  and  Democracy  65 

Conclusion    72 

Bibliography    76 

Vita    80 


CHAPTER  I 
INTRODUCTION 

The  era  in  which  society  now  finds  itself  is  conspicuously 
one  of  stress.  Out  of  the  vortex  of  a  world-wide  war  which 
threatened  to  undermine  the  very  structure  of  society  and  to 
render  desolate  and  void  the  accumulated  treasures  of  the 
race,  there  has  developed  in  the  minds  of  men  a  critical  atti- 
tude, a  spirit  of  challenge,  and  of  keen  penetrating  inquiry 
into  the  foundations  of  the  existing  social  economy.  No  in- 
stitution has  escaped  the  test;  the  school,  the  church,  the 
state,  the  home, — all  have  been  placed  on  trial,  and  all  are 
being  weighed  in  the  balance  of  public  opinion.  Out  of  the 
babel  of  confusion  that  exists  on  all  sides,  discrepant  voices 
are  heard.  On  one  side  it  is  the  voice  of  the  conservative, 
firm  in  the  conviction  that  the  present  order  is  inherently 
sound,  and  that  its  ills  can  be  assuaged  by  the  wise  and  benev- 
olent administration  of  constructive  reform.  On  the  other 
side  lifts  the  voice  of  the  extreme  reformer  feverishly  pro- 
claiming the  doctrine  of  radical  change  and  insistently  de- 
fending the  thesis  that  revolution,  not  evolution,  is  the  sesame 
to  a  more  benign  and  equitable  order. 

Society,  then,  is  in  flux.  It  is  becoming  extremely  self- 
conscious  and  critical.  Novel  interpretations  of  life  and  its 
meaning,  new  evaluations  of  society  and  its  institutions  are 
being  offered  in  abundance.  That  modern  society  has  ac- 
complished marvels  in  the  harnessing  of  the  forces  of  nature 
and  the  building  of  an  imposing  material  civilization,  there  is 
none  to  gainsay.  That  it  has  secured  like  triumphs  in  the  do- 
main of  the  spirit,  there  are  few  to  admit.  Shibboleths  are 
the  fashion  of  the  hour.  Democracy  is  a  word  to  be  conjured 
with.  Americanization  is  being  misunderstood  and  exploited ; 
in  many  quarters  it  assumes  a  sinister  guise  and  is  regarded 
with  suspicion.  Education  is  hailed  as  a  panacea ;  legislation 
receives  a  disproportionate  valuation,  and  progress  is  not  un- 
commonly identified  with  change. 

The  problems  of  the  hour  are  at  once  manifold  and  complex. 
Their  relations  are  well-nigh  limitless,  their  difficulties  well- 
nigh  inexhaustible.  However  much  therefore  the  many  cur- 
rent issues  may  appeal  to  intelligent  leadership  or  absorb  the 
mind  of  the  general  student,  it  shall  be  the  aim  of  this  dis- 
sertation to  limit  the  field  of  observation  and  to  focus  attention 
on  the  school  in  its  relation  to  the  federal  government,  and  to 
trace  first  of  all  the  evolution  of  national  interest  in  education; 


^  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

secondly,  to  examine  the  present  trend  in  Federal  educational 
legislation;  and  finally,  in  a  review  of  the  educational  demands 
of  a  democracy,  to  see  horn  far  national  control  and  direction 
operate  to  the  welfare  of  the  American  school. 

It  is  a  truism  that  every  society  tends  to  perpetuate  itself ; 
likewise  that  every  cultivated  society  sees  in  education  the 
chief  means  of  its  perpetuation  and  an  indispensable  mechan- 
ism of  social  control.  Under  democratic  forms  this  truth  con- 
veys a  special  meaning.  Democracy  has  an  abiding  faith  in 
education.  Its  very  existence  depends  upon  a  wide  diffusion 
of  knowledge  among  its  members.  Its  mainstay  is  a  moral, 
social,  and  educated  electorate.  Where  ignorance  thrives, 
free  institutions  must  inevitably  fail.  Autocracy  thrives  where 
minds  are  held  in  bondage. 

The  great  ideal  of  democracy  is  harmony  both  in  the  in- 
ternal and  external  relations  of  the  group.  It  assumes  that 
human  nature  is  not  fundamentally  vicious ;  it  rests  its  faith  on 
the  internal  forces  of  the  individual  and  on  his  capacity  for  en- 
lightened moral  co-operation.  It  finds  its  chief  support  not  in 
the  strong  arm  of  government  or  the  watchful  eye  of  surveil- 
lance, but  in  the  self-reliance  of  the  individual,  and  in  his  fund 
of  spiritual  and  moral  loyalties.  Its  call  is  the  call  to  service 
and  self-surrender;  due  subordination  and  devotion  to  the 
common  good  are  its  perennial  requisites. 

The  test  of  the  school  then  will  lie  in  its  contribution  to 
democracy.  That  the  test  is  acid,  and  that  the  challenge  to 
the  American  school  is  earnest  and  fundamental,  are  appar- 
ent upon  the  most  cursory  review  of  educational  literature. 
With  President  Butler  all  educators  are  agreed  that  "the  dif- 
ficulties of  democracy  are  the  opportunities  of  education."^ 
Have  our  schools  measured  up  to  their  opportunities?  Are 
they  laggard  in  their  service  to  democracy?  Thus  the  crucial 
test  is  being  fearlessly  administered. 

On  all  sides  the  lessons  of  the  war  are  being  formulated. 
Almost  daily  comes  new  report  of  the  dangers  of  democracy 
that  lurk  within  our  doors.  The  extent  of  our  national  illiter- 
acy startles  us ;  the  results  of  the  draft  prove  a  revelation,  and 
a  national  emergency  in  education  is  said  to  exist. 

"There  are  in  the  United  States  nearly  6,000,000  persons 
over  10  years  of  age  unable  to  read  or  write  (700,000  of  them 
young  men  who  were  liable  to  recent  draft  laws) .  Fifty-eight 
per  cent  of  these  illiterates  are  white  persons ;  28  per  cent  are 
native-born  whites,  and  30  per  cent  are  foreign-born  whites; 
40  per  cent  of  the  rest  are  negroes. 


»   Butler,    Nicholas  Murray,   The   Meaning  of  Education,   New  York,   1898,   p.   120. 


An  Exandnation  of  the  Federalization  Movement  3 

"To  educate  all  of  its  people  without  exception  is  both 
the  duty  and  the  right  of  democracy.  If  these  people  have 
been  deprived  of  educational  opportunities  in  their  youth,  it 
is  the  duty  of  the  Nation  to  extend  this  blessing  to  them  now 
in  their  years  of  majority;  if  these  people  have  neglected  their 
earlier  opportunities,  democracy  has  the  right  to  demand  that 
they  correct  the  deficiency  with  public  assistance  at  once."^ 

In  the  words  of  Franklin  K.  Lane,  late  Secretary  of  the 
Interior,  an  "uninformed  democracy  is  not  a  democracy."^ 
Without  a  wide  diffusion  of  knowledge,  progressive  democ- 
racy, social  cohesion,  community  of  ideals  and  sentiments  are 
equally  unthinkable.  Without  a  mentally  alert  plebiscite, 
the  demagogue  supplants  the  leader  and  odious  political  forms 
from  autocracy  to  mobocracy  are  quick  to  seize  dominion. 

The  situation  is  obvious,  and  the  investigation  reveals  the 
many  ills  that  endanger  the  body  social.  Out  of  the  many 
nostrums  that  have  been  prescribed,  society  must  make  a 
choice.  That  social  health  may  ensue,  the  group  must  employ 
the  trained  physician.  The  social  diagnosis  complete,  the 
remedy  must  be  appropriate.  Neither  the  wholesomeness  of 
the  group  nor  the  weal  of  its  individual  members  should  be 
impaired  in  the  treatment. 

To  insure  the  stability  of  our  institutions,  the  conviction 
is  widespread  that  educational  reform  is  imperative,  and  that 
the  Federal  Government  must  take  a  prominent  part  in  the 
reconstruction  movement.  The  fact  is  emphasized  that  the  in- 
dividual is  not  simply  a  citizen  of  his  community  or  State,  but 
of  the  nation  as  well.*  From  this  it  is  concluded  that  the  na- 
tion should  assume  a  more  generous  share  of  the  burden  in- 
volved in  the  education  of  its  citizens.  That  this  conviction 
is  taking  a  firm  hold  on  our  national  leaders  is  plainly  indi- 
cated in  current  legislative  procedure.  During  the  Sixty- 
sixth  Congress  there  were  pending  at  least  ninety-four  bills 
and  joint  resolutions  bearing  in  some  manner  on  education,' 
and  the  belief  exists  that  "relatively  few  persons  outside  of 
Congress  are  aware  either  of  the  multiplicity  of  the  legislative 
proposals,  or  of  the  manifest  consequences  which  some  of 
them  would  entail  if  enacted  into  law.."*  Doubtless  a  similar 
number  of  proposals  will  be  introduced  in  the  course  of  the 
present  (Sixty-seventh)  Congress. 


'  A  Manual  of  Educational  Legislation,  United  States  Bureau  of  Education,  Bulle- 
tin, 1919,  No.  4,  p.  5. 

•  Annual  Report,  Department  of  the   Interior,  Washington,  1918,   Vol.  I,  p.30. 

♦  Qaxton,  P.  P.,  Addresses  and  Proceedings,  N,  E.  A.,  1919,  VoL  LVII,  P.  87. 
»  The  Educational  Record,  Vol.   I,  No.  1,  p.4,  and  Vol.  1,  No.  2,  p.41. 

*  Ibid.,  Vol.   I,  No.  1,  p.   4. 


4  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

New  Federal  educational  legislation  is  imminent,  and  the 
reflective  mind  is  bound  to  ask :  To  what  extent  may  legisla- 
tion and  social  regimentation  be  said  to  be  conducive  to  the 
best  interests  of  democracy?  Are  the  problems  of  democracy 
to  be  solved  by  placing  our  reliance  on  external  compulsions 
and  attractive  short-cut  processes  fostered  by  the  subsidy  or 
directed  by  the  controlling  hand  of  the  nation?  Do  we  really 
know  what  democracy  means,  and  if  so,  is  our  faith  in  it  vital 
and  abiding  and  not  a  sham?  Are  we,  as  one  writer  says,  in 
danger  of  preserving  the  externals  and  killing  the  essentials  of 
democracy  V 

American  public  education  is  at  the  crossroads  and  its  fu- 
ture course  must  be  determined.  In  this,  as  in  all  matters  ef- 
fecting public  policy,  it  is  well  to  look  before  and  after.  A 
society  such  as  ours,  restless,  dynamic,  stripling,  and  impul- 
sive, may  well  take  pause  on  the  stream  of  change  lest  peril 
overtake  it.  The  doctrine  that  the  inevitable  tendency  in  the 
evolution  of  political  and  social  forms  is  toward  an  ever  in- 
creasing degree  of  centralization  finds  ample  expression  in 
current  sociological  and  educational  literature;  indeed,  it  is 
borne  out  most  clearly  in  the  facts  of  modern  industrial  life. 
It  cannot  be  maintained,  however,  that  in  this  centripetal 
drift  society  is  at  the  mercy  of  blind  and  fatalistic  forces.  So- 
ciety can  and  must  ponder  over  the  problems  of  democracy; 
it  must  summon  up  its  collective  wisdom  for  the  solution  of  its 
difficulties.  The  problems  are  not  easy;  their  solution  de- 
mands the  best  that  is  in  us.  They  deserve  the  common  coun- 
sel of  our  united  leadership  and  the  intelligent  interest  of  our 
citizenry.  Social  salvation  shall  be  the  reward  of  both  faith 
and  works. 


'  Cope,  Henry  Frederick,  Education  for  Democracy,  New   York,  1920,  p.   272. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  CENTRALIZATION  MOVEMENT— AN   HISTOR- 
ICAL SURVEY  FROM  REVOLUTIONARY  TIMES 
TO  THE  PASSING  OF  THE  SMITH-HUGHES  ACT 

The  present  tendency  of  educational  administration  and 
control  in  the  United  States  is  the  result  of  a  gradual  evolu- 
tion of  an  educational  ideal,  and  to  be  intelligible,  it  must  be 
seen  in  the  full  perspective  of  its  historic  background.  It  will 
therefore  be  the  purpose  of  this  chapter  to  survey  briefly  the 
development  of  Federal  interest  in  education  from  Revolu- 
tionary times  to  the  present. 

As  is  well-known,  the  Congress  legislates  concerning  mil- 
itary and  naval  training,  controls  education  in  the  District  of 
Columbia,  Alaska,  Porto  Rico,  the  Philippines,  and  Hawaii. 
Again,  Congress  appropriates  funds  in  favor  of  Howard  Uni- 
versity (for  negroes),  and  has  developed  an  eflFective  program 
for  the  education  of  the  American  Indian.  The  limitations  of 
this  dissertation,  however,  permit  consideration  only  of  the 
larger  educational  interests  of  the  Government,  and  of  the 
facts  and  tendencies  which  are  of  vital  import  to  the  Nation 
as  a  whole;  hence,  further  reference  to  the  above  mentioned 
policies  will  be  omitted. 

The  American  Fathers  and  Education 

It  is  insisted  by  Cubberley  that  the  American  Fathers 
were  indifferent  to  public  education :  "Not  until  the  begin- 
ning of  the  nineteenth  century  was  education  regarded  at  all 
as  a  legitimate  public  function.  At  the  time  of  the  formation 
of  the  Federal  Constitution,  education  was  not  considered  of 
sufficient  importance  to  receive  mention  in  the  document;  and 
so  far  as  there  is  any  recorded  mention  of  the  subject  in  the 
debates  of  the  constitutional  convention,  it  refers  to  a  national 
university  and  not  to  public  education.  The  reasons  for  this 
are  easy  to  see.  Education  was  then  a  luxury  and  not  a  neces- 
sity."® Similarly,  Horace  Mann  was  of  the  conviction  that 
the  subject  of  popular  education  was  not  mentioned  in  the 
convention  and  that  the  constitutions  of  only  three  of  the 
thirteen  original  States  made  the  obligation  to  maintain  a  sys- 
tem of  free  public  schools  a  part  of  their  fundamental  law.* 

Whatever  truth  there  may  be  in  the  statements  of  Cub- 
berley and  Mann,  it  cannot  be  held  that  the  Fathers  were 
wholly  unalive  to  the  importance  of  education.     The  North- 


*  Cubberley,  Ellwood  P.,  Changing  Conceptions  of  Education,  Boston,  1909,  p.  29. 

•  Mann,  Horace,  Lectures  on  Education.  Boston,  1855,  p.   238. 


6  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

west  Ordinance  of  May  20,  1785,  devised  to  dispose  of  land 
in  the  western  territory,  provided  that  "there  shall  be  re- 
served the  lot  No.  16  of  every  township,  for  the  maintenance 
of  public  schools  within  the  said  township."  This  embodies 
the  first  definite  Government  enactment  concerning  grants  of 
land  for  educational  purposes. ^°  Moreover,  in  Article  III  of 
the  Ordinance  of  1787,  there  appears  the  familiar  quotation: 
"Religion,  morality  and  knowledge  being  necessary  to  good 
government  and  the  happiness  of  mankind,  schools  and  the 
means  of  education  shall  forever  be  encouraged."  Again, 
Washington  in  his  message  to  Congress  in  1790  declared: 
"Knowledge  is,  in  every  country,  the  surest  basis  of  public 
happiness.  In  one  in  which  the  measures  of  government  re- 
ceive their  impression  so  immediately  as  in  ours  from  the  sense 
of  the  community,  it  is  proportionally  essential."  According 
to  one  of  his  contemporaries,  the  Reverend  Samuel  Knox, 
President  of  Frederick  Academy,  Maryland,  and  devotee  of 
education,  there  was  no  trait  in  Washington's  character  that 
has  afforded  a  more  convincing  proof  of  his  pure  regard  for 
civil  liberty  "than  his  patronage  and  liberal  encouragement  of 
public  education.""  His  plea  for  a  national  university  is  too 
well-known  to  require  comment.  Most  likely,  Washington's 
interest  lay  mainly  in  secondary  and  higher  institutions  of 
learning.  The  traditions  of  his  native  State,  Virginia,  were 
aristocratic,  and  elementary  education  received  little  atten- 
tion.^2  Further  interest  of  the  Fathers  in  education  is  gath- 
ered from  Draper  who  tells  us  that  while  the  Constitution  "is 
silent  upon  the  subject  of  first  public  concern,"  the  Fathers 
"were  neither  indifferent  nor  uninformed  about  it."^^  Educa- 
tion was  regarded  as  the  concern  of  the  local  communities. 
Accordingly,  it  has  continued  to  be  the  accepted  view  that 
"the  United  States  is  powerless  to  control  and  does  not  as- 
sume to  manage  the  educational  institutions  of  the  people; 
the  States  have  full  power  to  do  so."^* 

Like  Washington,  both  Jefferson  and  Madison  recognized 
that  the  national  welfare  depended  upon  the  general  dif- 
fusion of  knowledge.  While  many  statesmen  of  the  time  felt 
that  interference  of  the  several  States  in  education  was  justi- 
fied, the  vision  of  a  State  controlled  system  was  not  a  clear 
one,  and  moreover  was  decidedly  unwelcome  to  the  popular 


"  Germann,  George  B.,  National  Legisiation  Concerning  Education,  New  York, 
1899,    p.    17. 

**  Knox,  Samuel,  An  Essay  on  the  Best  System  of  Liberal  Education,  Adapted  to 
the  Genius  of  the  Government  of  the   United)  States,   Baltimore,  1799,   p.  29. 

"  Shields,    Thomas    Edward,    Philosophy    of   Education,    Washington,    1917,    p.    357. 

"Draper,  A.  S.,  "Functions  of  the  State  Touching  Education,"  Educational  Re- 
view, Feb.,   1898, 

"  Ibid. 


An  Excmtination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  7 

mind.  The  aim  of  education  was  individualistic,  and  people 
were  quite  unwilling  to  tax  themselves  for  the  purposes  of 
general  education.^^  The  social  significance  of  education 
could  scarcely  be  regarded  as  more  than  a  dawning  concept, 
dimly  appreciated  as  yet,  and  destined  to  wait  long  for  real- 
ization. 

Little  success  characterized  any  attempt  to  construct 
State  systems  until  at  length  the  persistent  activities  of  Hor- 
ace Mann  in  Massachusetts  and  Henry  Barnard  in  Connecti- 
cut gave  impetus  to  the  movement.^®  Their  influence  resulted 
in  the  appointment  of  superintendents  by  the  various  States 
and  in  the  elevation  of  the  standard  of  public  education. 
Schools  were  inspected,  institutes  organized,  and  the  State 
normal  schools  established.  Much  of  the  inspiration  for  the 
movement  came  from  Germany  where  State  systems  of 
schools  first  developed.^^ 

While  the  district  system  persevered  even  to  recent  years, 
the  sociological  tendency  constantly  gained  ground  from  1840 
on.  Under  the  State  system  the  conscious  emphasis  in  public 
education  became  mainly  "to  prepare  the  individual  to  exer- 
cise the  right  of  sufifrage  intelligently,  to  perform  the  duties 
of  citizenship  fully  and  honestly,  to  discharge  the  duties  of 
office  satisfactorily."^®  As  the  years  have  passed,  the  social 
movement  has  received  increasing  impetus  and  its  interpre- 
tation has  been  significantly  widened. 

Demand  for  a  National  Bureau  of  Education 

Almost  concomitantly  with  the  rise  of  the  State  school 
systems  the  idea  developed  that  the  nation  should  interest 
itself  in  the  work  of  education  by  establishing  a  "bureau  in 
the  home  department  for  obtaining  and  publishing  annually 
statistical  information  in  regard  to  public  education  in  the 
United  States."^®  A  memorial  to  this  end  was  reported  by 
Henry  Barnard  at  the  national  convention  of  the  friends  of 
common  schools,  October  17,  1849,  at  which  Horace  Mann 
presided.^**  Eleven  years  before,  Barnard  had  visited  Wash- 
ington to  learn  what  school  statistics  existed  there,  and  find- 
ing that  the  department  in  charge  of  the  census  had  done  noth- 
ing to  collect  them,  "he  brought  to  the  attention  of  President 
Van  Buren  the  desirability  of  including  educational  statistics 


"  Shields,    T.    E.,    Phil,    of    Ed.,    Washington,    1917,    pp.    359-360. 

"  McCormick,   Patrick  J.,   History   of  Education,   Washington,   1915,  pp.    382-383. 

"  Monroe,  Paul,  A  Brief  Course  in  the  History  of  Education,  New  York,  1916, 
p.  387  and  p.  393. 

"/bid.,  p.   394. 

"  Steiner,  Bernard  C.  Life  of  Henry  Barnard,  United  States  Bureau  of  Educa- 
tion, Bulletin,  1919,  No.  8,  p.  69. 

»Ihid..  pp.   68-69. 


8  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

in  the  census  of  1840.  These  statistics  were  secured  and  con- 
stituted the  earliest  recognition  of  education  by  the  Federal 
Government.  Barnard  and  Mann  used  these  statistics  in 
1842  to  show  the  magnitude  of  the  educational  interest  and 
the  'utter  inadequacy  of  existing  means  of  popular  education 
to  meet  the  emergencies  of  a  republican  government'."^^  At 
the  meeting  of  the  same  organization  in  1854,  he  emphasized 
the  desirability  of  having  the  National  Government  through 
a  competent  officer  issue  an  annual  educational  report.^ 

Steiner^^  gives  an  interesting  report  of  the  persevering 
labor  and  the  many  steps  involved  in  shaping  the  bill  for  a 
national  bureau.  The  original  bill  providing  a  bureau  in  the 
Interior  Department,  such  as  now  exists,  was  amended  in  the 
course  of  proceedings  to  establish  the  Department  of  Educa- 
tion on  the  ground  that  the  commissioner  should  enjoy  a  place 
in  the  President's  cabinet.  Thus  the  first  bill  for  the  creation 
of  a  Department  of  Education  was  introduced  in  the  House  of 
Representatives  in  1866  by  James  A.  Garfield.  In  the  Senate 
the  proposal  was  earnestly  championed  by  Charles  Sumner. 
The  bill  passed  the  Senate  in  February,  1867,  and  received 
President  Johnson's  signature  on  the  second  day  of  March  of 
the  same  year.  As  was  indeed  fitting,  Henry  Barnard  was 
appointed  first  commissioner,  a  post  which  his  unflagging  zeal 
in  the  interests  of  education  richly  merited  for  him,  and  which 
he  was  destined  to  fill  with  consummate  ability  and  distinc- 
tion. A  man  of  unusual  capacity  and  enthusiasm,  gifted  with 
rare  inspiration  and  vision,  he  lifted  his  office  to  a  high  level 
of  efficiency  and  set  the  high  standard  which  the  position  has 
since  so  consistently  maintained. 

Barnard's  first  report^*  submitted  June  2,  1868,  was  not 
however  favorably  received,  and  as  a  result  the  Department 
of  Education  was  abolished  and  in  its  place  an  Office  of  Edu- 
cation subordinate  to  the  Department  of  the  Interior  was 
created.  Not  long  after  the  name  was  changed  to  the  Bureau 
of  Education,  under  which  it  is  known  to  the  present.  Ac- 
cording to  the  revised  statutes,  the  Bureau  is  empowered  "to 
collect  statistics  and  facts  showing  the  condition  and  progress 
of  education  in  the  several  States  and  territories,  and  to  dif- 
fuse such  information  respecting  the  organization  and  man- 
agement of  schools  and  school  systems  and  methods  of  teach- 
ing as  shall  aid  the  States  in  the  establishment  and  mainte- 
nance of  efficient  school  systems  and  otherwise  promote  the 
cause  of  education  throughout  the  country."     According  to 

"7&id.,  p.   104. 

"  Ibid.,  p.  105. 

''Ibid.,  p.   106    ff. 

'*Ibid.,  p.   106. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  9 

Barnard^^  the  bill  did  not  contemplate  the  creation  of  a  na- 
tional system  of  education.  As  commissioner  he  had  no 
prejudices  to  impose  on  the  country.  It  was  his  purpose 
rather  to  bring  to  light  whatever  could  be  gathered  from  past 
and  present  experience. 

In  summing  up  the  work  of  Mann  and  Barnard  we  may 
say,  then,  that  their  efforts  did  much  to  arouse  the  educational 
interest  of  the  people  of  the  various  States,  and  to  lift  the 
American  school  out  of  the  intolerable  isolation  in  which  the 
policy  of  disintegration  had  withheld  it ;  we  may  truly  say  that 
with  them  there  was  instituted  the  beginning  of  the  national 
outlook  in  education. 

Agricultural  Education — The  Land  Grant  Colleges 
Federal  interest  in  agricultural  education  dates  back  to 
the  middle  of  the  last  century.  As  early  as  1840,  Congress 
received  a  petition  from  the  Kentucky  State  Agricultural  So- 
ciety praying  that  funds  of  the  Smithsonian  legacy  be  de- 
voted to  the  endowment  of  an  agricultural  college.^^  In  1848, 
a  petition  from  a  citizen  of  New  York  was  presented  urging 
that  Congress  appropriate  funds  in  favor  of  the  State  Govern- 
ments "to  the  establishment  of  institutions  of  science  and 
agriculture.""  A  number  of  similar  petitions  soon  followed. 
Responding  to  the  sentiment  in  this  direction,  Mr.  Morrill,  of 
Vermont,  introduced  a  resolution  in  February,  1850,  inquiring 
into  the  expediency  of  establishing  one  or  more  national  agri- 
cultural schools,  and  in  1857  sponsored  a  bill  donating  public 
lands  to  the  States,  that  colleges  of  agriculture  and  mechanic 
arts  might  be  established.-^  This  bill  was  lost  and  was  not 
introduced  again  until  1862  when  it  was  finally  carried  in 
Congress  and  approved  by  President  Lincoln.  This  represents 
the  first  grant  of  public  lands  to  the  old  States  for  educational 
purposes. 

Thenceforth  Government  interest  in  agricultural  educa- 
tion has  been  constant.  According  to  Congressman  Lever,^^ 
the  "passage  of  the  first  Morrill  Act  for  the  endowment  and 
maintenance  of  at  least  one  agricultural  college  in  each  State 
committed  the  Federal  Government  emphatically  and  irrevoc- 
ably to  a  policy  of  appropriating  money  to  aid  in  acquiring 
and  diffusing  among  the  people  of  the  United  States  useful  in- 
formation on  subjects  connected  with  agriculture."  Accord- 
's jfcij.,  p.   109. 

*»Germann,    George    B.,    National    Legislation    Concerning    Education.    New    York. 

1899,  p.  37. 
^  Ihid.,    p.    37. 
'^  Ibid,,   p.    39. 
''Report    to    accompany    H.    R,    7951.  Co-operative    Agricultural    Extension    Work. 

Report  No.   110.  63rd  Congress,   2nd  Session,   p.  2. 


10  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

ing  to  Mr.  Lever's  estimate  in  1913,  the  Federal  Government 
has  spent  in  the  last  fifty  years  for  the  maintenance  of  agri- 
cultural colleges  and  the  State  experiment  stations  a  sum 
approximating  $70,000,000.80  T^e  First  Morrill  Act  was  fol- 
lowed by  the  Hatch  Act  of  1887  which  provided  for  the  es- 
tablishment of  experiment  stations,  and  by  the  Second  Mor- 
rill Act  of  1890  which  was  "to  apply  a  portion  of  the  pro- 
ceeds of  the  public  lands  to  the  more  complete  endowment 
and  support  of  the  colleges  for  the  benefit  of  agriculture  and 
the  mechanic  arts."  Finally  in  1914,  the  Agricultural  Exten- 
sion Act  (Smith-Lever  Bill)  was  passed,  the  intent  of  this 
measure  being  "to  provide  for  co-operative  agricultural  col- 
leges in  the  several  States  receiving  the  benefits  of  an  Act  of 
Congress  approved  July  second,  eighteen  hundred  sixty-two," 
etc. 

As  has  been  pointed  out  by  Germann,^^  in  all  of  the  edu- 
cational relations  of  the  Government  up  to  and  including  the 
Second  Morrill  Act,  but  excliisive  of  its  relations  to  the 
schools  of  the  District  of  Columbia,  the  territorial  and  Indian 
schools,  "the  General  Government  has  functioned  merely  as 
a  patron  of  education,  without  exercising  or  even  attempting 
to  exercise  an  administrative  control  over  the  beneficiaries 
of  its  largesses."  While  few  conditions  were  imposed  in  earlier 
enactments,  the  Smith-Lever  Act  of  1914  involved  many.  That 
the  Federal  Government  has  the  right  to  maintain  an  admin- 
istrative control  over  the  funds  issued  to  the  States  is  now 
quite  generally  sustained ;  in  fact,  it  is  a  fundamental  assump- 
tion in  the  Vocational  Education  Act  of  1917,  in  the  Voca- 
tional Rehabilitation  Act  approved  June,  1920,  and  in  many 
other  bills  that  were  pending  during  the  Sixty-sixth  and  Sixty- 
seventh  Congresses.  It  is  quite  apparent,  therefore,  that  in  all 
similar  measures  in  the  future,  the  Federal  Government  will 
control  the  conditions  under  which  its  moneys  are  disbursed 
by  the  States.  According  to  the  Second  Annual  report  of  the 
Federal  Board  for  Vocational  Education,^-  "we  have  passed 
from  the  idea  of  the  use  of  Federal  money  for  indefinite  edu- 
cational purposes  to  the  use  of  Federal  money  for  very  spe- 
cific educational  purposes  carefully  defined  in  the  statute.  We 
have  passed  from  the  idea  of  no  obligation  on  the  part  of  the 
State  in  the  expenditure  of  Federal  money  to  the  conception 
of  a  solemn  obligation  on  the  part  of  the  State  to  use  the 
money  in  conformity  with  the  requirements  of  the  law  mak- 
ing the  appropriation;  from  the  idea  of  no   machinery,  no 


*^Ihid.,   p.   2. 

"  Germann,   Geo.   B.,  Op.   cit.,   p.  56. 

"  Washington,    1918,    p.    10. 


An  Excmiination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  11 

system,  and  no  organization  to  safeguard  and  administer  the 
funds  to  the  idea  of  a  definite  system,  a  thoroughgoing  organ- 
ization, and  careful  safeguards  in  order  that  the  Federal 
money  may  be  spent  effectively  for  the  purposes  intended." 
This  obviously  indicates  a  progressive  step  in  the  centraliza- 
tion movement,  and  is  not  without  its  message  for  those  who 
steadfastly  maintain  that  current  educational  measures  now 
pending  in  Congress  and  carrying  large  financial  appropria- 
tions, (notably  the  Sterling-Towner  Bill),  in  no  way  involve 
Federal  control  of  education  in  the  several  States. 

According  to  Andrews,^^  there  are  now  fifty-three  institu- 
tions in  the  list  of  land-grant  colleges.  The  first  recipient  of 
a  share  of  the  land  grant  fund  was  Kansas  State  Agricultural 
College  which  has  been  a  beneficiary  since  September,  1862. 
The  University  of  Arizona  is  the  latest  beneficiary,  having  re- 
ceived funds  only  since  June,  1910.  The  total  yearly  income 
from  the  fund  as  disbursed  in  1914  consisted  of  $856,318.95. 

Vocational  Education  Under  the  Smith-Hughes  Act 
The  Smith-Hughes  Act,  approved  February,  1917,  is  "An 
Act  to  provide  for  the  promotion  of  vocational  education;  to 
provide  for  co-operation  with  the  States  in  the  promotion  of 
such  education  in  agriculture  and  the  trades  and  industries ; 
to  provide  for  co-operation  with  the  States  in  the  preparation 
of  teachers  of  vocational  subjects;  and  to  appropriate  money 
and  regulate  its  expenditure." 

This  Act  represents  "the  culmination  of  an  evolution  in 
national  appropriations  for  vocational  education."^*  Begin- 
ning with  the  Morrill  Act  of  1862,  the  Federal  Government 
has,  by  a  series  of  acts,  the  Second  Morrill  Act,  the  Nelson 
Amendment,  the  Adams  Act,  the  Smith-Lever  Act,  and  the 
Vocational  Education  Act,  gradually  found  its  way  to  a  phil- 
osophy and  policy  in  the  use  of  national  money  for  vocational 
educational  purposes,  and  in  this  span  of  legislation  has  passed 
from  the  idea  of  granting  Federal  moneys  for  indefinite  edu- 
cational purposes  to  an  exacting,  specific  and  definitive  pol- 
icy in  its  requirements  upon  the  States  in  the  use  of  Federal 
funds.^**  Of  all  Federal  enactments  up  to  the  present,  none 
imposes  more  conditions  or  embodies  more  specific  obliga- 
tions upon  the  States  than  does  the  Smith-Hughes  Act.  The 
central  reason  for  the  various  restrictions  was  to  render  the 


"Andrews,  Benj.  F.,  The  Land  Grant  of  1862  and  the  Land  Grant  Colleges,  U.  S. 
Bureau   of  Education,  Bulletin,   1918,   No.    13,  pp.   58-63. 

**  Second  Annual  Report  of  the  Federal  Board  for  Vocational  Education,  Wash- 
ington, 1918,  p.  9. 

"Ibid.,  p.  9-10. 


12  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

Act  generally  effective,  and  to  prevent  misapplication  of  Fed- 
eral moneys. 

According  to  the  Statement  of  Policies^®  of  the  Federal 
Board  for  Vocational  Education  created  by  the  Act,  the 
Grovernment  does  not  propose  "to  undertake  the  organization 
and  immediate  direction"  of  vocational  education  in  the  States 
but  "undertakes  to  pay  over  to  the  States  annually  certain 
sums  of  money  and  to  co-operate  in  fostering  and  promoting 
vocational  training  and  the  training  of  vocational  teachers." 
Although  co-operation  on  the  part  of  the  States  was  not  co- 
erced by  the  measure,  the  various  States  Were  quick  in  pass- 
ing enabling  acts  to  avail  themselves  of  its  provisions,  and 
they  universally  agreed  to  meet  the  specific  obligations  out- 
lined in  the  Act.  According  to  Section  8  of  the  Act,  the 
State  Board  (appointed  by  each  of  the  several  States  to  ad- 
minister the  Act  in  their  respective  areas)  must  "prepare 
plans,  showing  the  kind  of  vocational  education  for  which  it 
is  proposed  that  the  appropriation  shall  be  used;  the  kind  of 
schools  and  equipment ;  courses  of  study ;  methods  of  in- 
struction," etc.,  and  if,  upon  submission,  the  "Federal  Board 
finds  the  same  to  be  in  conformity  with  the  provisions  and 
purposes  of  the  Act,  the  same  shall  be  approved." 

The  appropriations  available  under  the  Act  increase  an- 
nually until  1926,  when  the  total  appropriation  available  for 
the  purposes  of  the  Act  reaches  its  maximum,  $7,200,000.  Sub- 
ventions are  made  to  the  States  on  condition  that  they  cover 
dollar  for  dollar  the  sums  apportioned  them,  and  provided 
further  that  they  spend  said  moneys  in  accordance  with  the 
requirements  of  the  Act. 

The  autonomy  of  the  States,  it  is  held,  "has  been  entirely 
preserved"  by  the  following  provisions  :^^ 

1.  The  Federal  Government  deals  with  the  work  in  the 
States  only  through  an  official  State  board  created  by  the 
legislative  machinery  of  the  State. 

2.  The  Federal  Government  deals  with  the  State  in  terms 
of  standards  and  policies  and  not  in  terms  of  particular  in- 
stitutions or  individuals. 

3.  The  Federal  Government  deals  with  the  State  in  terms 
of  the  conditions  within  that  State  and  not  in  terms  of  the 
United  States  as  a  whole. 

In  addition,  the  Board  offers  four  fundamental  principles 
as  a  raison  d'etre  for  co-operation  on  the  part  of  the  Federal 


'<>  Bulletin,    No.    1,    The    Federal    Board    for    Vocational    Education,     Washington, 

1917,  p.  7. 
«^  Second  Annual  Report  of  Federal  Board,  Washington,   1918,  p.   11. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  13 

Government  with  the  States  in  the  promotion  of  vocational 
training  :^^ 

1.  That  vocational  education  being  essential  to  national 
welfare,  it  is  a  function  of  the  National  Government  to  stim- 
ulate the  States  to  undertake  this  new  and  needed  form  of 
service. 

2.  That  Federal  funds  are  necessary  in  order  to  equalize 
the  burden  of  carrying  on  the  work  among  the  States. 

3.  That  since  the  Federal  Government  is  vitally  interested 
in  the  success  of  vocational  education,  it  should,  so  to  speak, 
purchase  a  degree  of  participation  in  this  work. 

4.  That  only  by  creating  such  a  relationship  between  the 
Federal  and  the  State  Governments  can  proper  standards  of 
educational  efficiency  be  set  up. 

While  previous  enactments  permitted  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment to  deal  directly  with  individual  institutions,  the  Smith- 
Hughes  Act  differs  in  this  respect;  it  touches  the  State  only 
through  the  State  Board,  and  thus  not  only  the  administration 
of  the  Act  is  facilitated,  but,  it  is  further  maintained,  the 
autonomy  of  the  State  is  not  interfered  with.^^  In  a  word, 
"partly  by  the  Act  itself,  partly  by  the  Federal  Board,  stand- 
ards of  vocational  education  are  established  meeting  the  ap- 
probation of  both  the  State  and  Federal  Governments.  Each 
in  its  own  sphere  supreme,  the  State  Board  and  Federal  Board, 
in  order  to  function  at  all,  must  come  together  on  the  ground 
thus  briefly  described."*^ 

The  foregoing  paragraphs  may  be  said  to  give  as  impartial 
and  complete  an  analysis  of  the  import  of  the  Act  as  the  lim- 
itations of  this  study  permit.  In  passing,  however,  it  may 
be  well  to  summarize  briefly  the  prevailing  attitude  in  ref- 
erence to  the  trend  vocationally. 

In  the  mind  of  Professor  Sharp,  "American  education  is  go- 
ing vocationally  mad,  going  bad ;  for  behind  this  mischievous 
propaganda  is  a  purpose  and  a  philosophy  not  had  of  democ- 
racy."*^ Ellwood  complains  that  enthusiasts  for  vocational 
education  confuse  it  with  socialized  education  in  general;  he 
insists  that  vocationalization  is  only  a  part  of  socialization, 
and  that  it  can  be  made  safe  for  democracy  only  by  becoming 
a  part  of  a  general  program  of  socialized  education.*^  Jn 
other  words,  the  purely  vocational  curriculum  needs  to  be  lib- 
eralized   by   a    reasonable    infiltration    of   cultural    elements. 

»Ihid.,    p.    11. 

"/frirf.,  p.    13-14. 

^Bulletin   No.    1,    The     Federal    Board     for     Vocational     Education,     Statement     of 

Policies,   Washington,   1917,  p.   8. 
"  Sharp,  Dallas  Lore,  Patrons  of  Democracy,  Boston,  1919,  p.  16. 
**  Ellwood,    Charles    S.,    Sociology   and   Modern   Social   Problems,    New   York,    1919, 

pp.   384-385. 


14  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

Dewey  is  of  like  mind  with  Snedden  in  the  belief  that  "exist- 
ing economic  conditions  inevitably  produce  social  statifica- 
tion,"*^  and  inclines  to  the  view  that  "any  scheme  of  voca- 
tional education  which  takes  its  point  of  departure  from  the 
industrial  regime  that  now  exists,  is  likely  to  assume  and  to 
perpetuate  its  divisions  and  weaknesses,  and  thus  to  become 
an  instrument  in  accomplishing  the  feudal  dogma  of  social 
predestination.  Those  who  are  in  a  position  to  make  their 
wishes  good,  will  demand  a  liberal,  a  cultural  occupation,  and 
one  which  fits  for  directive  power  the  youth  in  whom  they 
are  directly  interested.  To  split  the  system  and  give  to  others 
less  fortunately  situated,  an  education  conceived  mainly  as  a 
specific  trade  preparation,  is  to  treat  the  schools  as  an  agency 
for  transferring  the  older  division  of  labor  and  leisure,  cul- 
ture and  service,  mind  and  body,  directed  and  directive  class, 
into  a  society  nominally  democratic."** 

An  excellent  illustration  of  narrow  vocationalism  may  be 
gathered  from  one  of  the  earlier  writings  of  David  Snedden, 
the  well-known  authority  on  the  subject.  In  the  volume, 
"Educational  Readjustment,''  published  in  1913,  he  states  that 
"in  vocational  schools  the  standards  of  vocational  education 
should  control  to  the  degree  found  essential  to  vocational  ef- 
ficiency. Given  this  condition,  place  may  be  found  in  the 
program  for  some  general  education,  but  the  latter  must  be 
so  organized  as  not  to  interfere  with  the  systematic  voca- 
tional work.  For  example,  studies  not  connected  with  voca- 
tional education  should  probably  not  be  followed  during  the 
active  working  day."*®  This  attitude  has  not  failed  to  appeal 
to  the  selfish  mercantile  and  industrial  interests,  and  it  clearly 
reflects  the  mind  of  those  who  emphasize  vocational  fitness  to 
the  neglect  of  social  efficiency.  According  to  Cope,  such  train- 
ing loses  sight  of  the  value  of  personality  since  it  seeks  to 
develop  only  workers  or  efficient  machines;  learning  to  make 
a  living  is  only  a  part  of  life,  and  by  no  means  does  it  imply 
that  the  young  should  be  deprived  of  their  heritage  of  joy 
and  culture  in  order  that  they  may  acquire  the  habits  of  wage- 
earning.*®  In  like  manner,  Ryan  maintains  that  vocational 
training  "must  be  established  on  a  democratic  basis  and  given 
in  a  democratic  spirit,  so  that  the  recipients  shall  neither  be 
marked  off  as  a  separate  and  lower  class  in  separate  schools, 

"  Snedden,    David,    Vocational   Education,    New   York,    1920,    p.   66. 

**  Dewey,  John,  Democracy  and  Education,   New  York,  1916,  p.  372. 

*'  Snedden,    David,    Educational    Readjustment,    Boston,    1913,    pp.    190    ff. 

*"  Cope,  Henry  F.,  Education  for  Democracy,  New  York,  1920,  p,   13,  also  p.  53. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  15 

nor  deprived  of  that  amount  of  general  education  which  should 
be  available  for  all  elements  of  the  population."*'' 

The  conviction  is  gaining  ground  therefore  that  society 
will  have  to  counteract  the  selfish  vocational  tendency  whose 
explicit  aim  is  increased  individual  efficiency  and  enlarged 
earning  power.*^  The  regimentation  and  discipline  of  the 
classes  for  vocational  efficiency  without  giving  them  an  ap- 
propriate share  in  the  common  spiritual  and  social  inheritance 
of  the  race  is  coming  to  be  regarded  as  the  expression  of  an 
unsavory  materialism,  and  the  antithesis  of  true  democracy. 
It  is  encouraging  to  note  in  the  reconstruction  literature  that 
vocational  education  is  being  conceived  in  a  more  valid  and 
harmonious  relation  to  the  other  essential  influences  that  make 
for  individual  development.  To  quote  from  Snedden's  re- 
cent work:  "The  primary  object  of  the  state  or  of  society 
in  its  collective  capacity  in  promoting  effective  vocational 
education  may  be  considered  to  be  the  safety  of  the  state 
itself.  Nevertheless,  the  security  and  effectiveness  of  the  state 
can  be  achieved  as  one  of  its  conditions  only  by  means  of  in- 
dividuals who  are  in  themselves  effective  physically,  vocation- 
ally, civically,  and  culturally."**  Christianity,  finally,  would 
insist  that  the  individual's  social  adjustment  is  rendered  all 
the  more  secure  by  adding  the  further  condition  that  he  be 
morally  effective. 

From  these  paragraphs  it  may  reasonably  be  inferred  that 
the  administration  of  vocational  education  under  the  Federal 
Board  has  not  been  regarded  as  an  unmixed  blessing.  In 
some  quarters  the  Act  has  met  with  considerable  disfavor;  in 
fact,  many  prominent  educators  fear  that  the  Act  infringes 
upon  the  autonomy  of  the  States,  and  that  its  plan  of  opera- 
tion is  too  highly  centralized.  In  a  statement  submitted  to 
the  Committee  on  Education  of  Congress,  Keith  insisted  that 
the  Smith-Hughes  Law  is  "the  one  Federal  educational  act 
above  all  others  that  causes  friction  in  the  States  by  virtue  of 
its  infringement  upon  the  rights  of  the  States  to  organize, 
supervise,  and  administer  education  within  their  borders. 
Until  this  act  is  changed,  its  administration  is  a  liability 
rather  than  an  asset  to  any  division,  bureau,  or  depart- 
ment."^* Similarly,  President  A.  F.  Woods,  of  the  University 
of  Maryland,  in  an  address  delivered  at  the  Third  Annual 

"  Ryan,  John  A.,  The  Catholic  Educational  Association  Bulletin,  Vol.  XVI,  No.  2, 
Report  of  Proceedings,  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  1919,  "Vocational  Education  in  a  Demo- 
cratic State." 

^Shields,  T.   E.,  Phil,   of  Ed.,   Washington,   1917,   p.   370. 

*•  Snedden,    David,    Vocational    Education,    New    York,    1920,    p.    38. 

'^  Joint  Hearings  Before  the  Committees  on  Education,  Congress  of  the  United 
States,  67th  Congress,  1st  Session,  on  S.  1607  and  H.  R.  5837,  May,  1921, 
pp.  95-96. 


16  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

Meeting  of  the  American  Council  on  Education,  May  7,  1920, 
declared  that  in  the  Smith-Hughes  Act  ''there  is  too  much  of 
a  tendency  to  control  the  details  of  the  operation  of  the  Act 

in  the  various  States I  think  that  as  a  result  of 

our  experience  under  the  Smith-Hughes  Act,  that  future  legis- 
lation should  carefully  preserve  the  powers  of  the  States.  This 
would  reserve  to  the  States  the  right  to  utilize  the  powers  of 
the  Act  under  their  various  conditions  in  the  most  effective 
way  without  too  high  a  degree  of  centralization.  It  will 
never  be  possible  for  any  Secretary  of  Education  or  any  other 
such  officer  to  fully  appreciate  and  understand  the  problems 
that  each  State  may  have  to  deal  with  in  the  various  local- 
ities."^* However,  the  friends  of  the  Act  insist  that  its  op- 
eration to  date  has  been  successful,  and  that  the  results  thus 
far  achieved  amply  justify  its  existence;  believing  that  its  plan 
is  sound,  they  are  now  supporting  the  Kenyon  Bill,^^  which 
amends  the  Smith-Hughes  Act,  and  provides  increased  ap- 
propriations for  the  purpose  of  co-operating  with  the  States  in 
home  economics  education. 

In  a  later  chapter  there  will  follow  a  more  minute  criticism 
of  the  policy  of  Federal  control  of  education.  Accordingly 
further  study  of  the  principles  involved  in  the  Smith-Hughes 
Act  is  rendered  unnecessary  at  this  point.  So  far  we  have 
surveyed  briefly  the  relation  of  the  Federal  Government  to 
education  up  to  the  far-reaching  legislative  movement  ushered 
in  since  the  war.  Our  next  chapter  will  be  devoted  to  a  re- 
view of  the  measures  now  pending  in  Congress,  and  to  an 
appreciation  and  criticism  of  their  general  import. 


w  The  Educational  Record,  Vol.  I,  No.  4,  "The  Operation  of  the  Smith-Lever  Act 
and  its  Bearing  on  Future  Educational  Legislation."  Note:  Taking  cognizance  of 
the  features  of  the  Smith-Lever  and  Smith-Hughes  Acts  which  impair  the  educa- 
tional authority  and  responsibility  of  the  States,  the  Department  of  Superintend- 
ence  of  the  N.  E.  A.,  meeting  at  Chicago,  March  2,  19(22,  resolved  to  call  upon 
Congress  to  amend  those  measures. 

"»  S.  1061,  introduced  in  the  67th  Congress,  1st  Session,  April  21,  1921. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  CENTRALIZATION  MOVEMENT  AT  PRESENT: 
PENDING  LEGISLATION 

As  we  noted  in  Chapter  I,  there  were  pending  during  the 
Sixty-sixth  Congress  more  than  ninety  bills  and  joint  reso- 
lutions bearing  in  some  manner  on  education.  To  be  sure, 
the  vast  majority  of  these  measures  were  not  reported  on  the 
floor  of  either  house  during  that  session  of  Congress.  The 
Senate  was  preoccupied  with  important  international  issues, 
and  both  in  the  Senate  and  in  the  House  educational  matters 
were  obliged  to  give  way  to  a  multitude  of  other  affairs. 
Urgent  though  the  emergency  in  education  was  presumed  to 
be,  the  failure  of  Congress  to  pass  any  of  the  measures  has 
not  been  generally  regretted.  In  the  first  place,  the  nature 
of  the  emergency  was  not  fully  appreciated.  Secondly,  while 
not  a  few  realized  that  something  ought  to  be  done  and  done 
quickly,  the  character  of  the  legislation  best  adapted  to  meet 
the  crisis  had  not  become  clearly  evident,  and  the  conscience 
of  the  American  people  at  large  was  barely  awakening  to 
the  facts  of  the  situation,  and  ideas  concerning  advisable  pro- 
cedure were  but  slowly  beginning  to  crystallize  in  various 
parts  of  the  country.  Finally,  the  national  election  of  1920 
was  approaching,  and  in  the  excited  political  atmosphere  prior 
to  the  election,  it  was  not  to  be  expected  that  Congress  as  a 
whole  would  be  able  or  even  disposed  to  consider  carefully 
the  merits  of  the  many  educational  resolutions  that  had  been 
introduced  before  it. 

Despite  the  inaction  of  Congress,  the  many  advocates  of 
educational  reform  remained  undaunted,  and  at  once  pro- 
ceeded with  renewed  zest  to  take  every  possible  step  to  secure 
favorable  action  in  the  subsequent  session.  Practically  every 
available  instrument  of  propaganda  was  resorted  to,  and 
school  campaigns  held  in  various  States  emphasized  the  para- 
mount need  of  greater  interest  in  the  movement  for  increased 
educational  efficiency  throughout  the  nation.  The  Sixty-sixth 
Congress,  however,  concluded  its  labors  March  4,  1921,  and 
in  the  jam  of  legislation  preceding  adjournment,  the  pending 
educational  bills  were  lost.  At  present,  a  strong  movement 
is  under  way  to  bring  about  early  consideration  of  them  in 
the  Sixty-seventh  Congress. 

It  will  be  readily  conceded  that  the  many  bills  now  pending 
are  not  of  equal  import,  and  therefore  do  not  require  uniform 

17 


18  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

treatment  in  the  course  of  this  dissertation;  hence,  it  will  be 
our  purpKDse  to  consider  only  the  more  significant  and  charac- 
teristic measures,  and,  as  far  as  possible,  to  study  the  funda- 
mental principles  involved  in  the  bills  pointing  out  the  prin- 
cipal criticisms  which  have  been  advanced  with  regard  to 
them.  Pursuing  this  plan  it  will  be  possible  at  least  to  dis- 
cern the  general  trend  of  the  Federalization  movement.  The 
less  comprehensive  measures  will  be  taken  up  first,  and  ac 
cordingly  the  analysis  of  the  Sterling-Towner  Bill  will  be 
reserved  to  the  subsequent  chapter. 

The  Kenyon  Bill,  S.  846 

The  purpose  of  this  bill  is  "to  promote  Americanization 
by  providing  for  co-operation  with  the  several  States  in  the 
education  of  non-English  speaking  persons  and  the  assimila- 
tion of  foreign-born  residents,  and  for  other  purposes." 

A  somewhat  similar  bill  was  introduced  in  the  66th  Con- 
gress by  Senator  Kenyon,  and  succeeded  in  passing  the 
Senate  January  26,  1920.  The  bill  was  straightway  referred 
to  the  House  Committee  on  Education  for  action,  but  failed 
to  obtain  the  sanction  of  the  House.  Undoubtedly  a  more 
determined  effort  would  have  been  made  to  have  the  measure 
pass  the  lower  chamber  had  not  an  Americanization  clause 
been  inserted  in  the  Smith-Towner  (now  Sterling-Towner) 
Bill,  which  was  likewise  pending  in  the  House.  The  rein- 
troduction  of  the  Kenyon  Bill  has  led  to  the  observation  that 
a  number  of  the  less  comprehensive  education  bills  endeavor 
to  achieve  piecemeal  and  singly  what  the  Sterling-Towner 
Bill  purports  to  achieve  in  one  large  sweep. 

The  Americanization  movement  originated  as  a  war 
measure.  America  was  conscious  from  the  outset  of  the 
World  War  of  the  heterogeneity  of  ideals  and  sentiments  that 
prevailed  among  her  inhabitants.  During  the  previous  de- 
cades, many  sociologists  had  fancied  America  as  "the  melting 
pot,"  and  had  placed  a  higher  value  on  the  product  of  the 
amalgamation  process  than  results  seemed  later  to  justify. 
Consequently,  it  came  to  be  feared  that  our  society  was  seg- 
mented, and  that  the  social  and  racial  stratifications  evidently 
in  existence,  would,  if  left  to  themselves,  become  a  serious 
menace  to  the  stability  of  our  institutions  and  to  the  solidar- 
ity of  our  democracy.  In  addition  to  this,  the  draft  revela- 
tions offered  abundant  testimony  of  the  deficient  education  of 
our  people.  Indications  from  all  sides  pointed  out  that  huge 
numbers  of  our  population  had  failed  to  develop  the  Ameri- 
can sense,  and  that  many  of  their  ideals  and  aspirations  were 
alien  to  the  heart  of  America. 


An  ExanUnation  of  the  Federalisation  Movement  19 

It  soon  became  apparent  that  national  interest  should 
be  aroused,  and  at  the  suggestion  of  the  National  Committee 
of  One  Hundred,  the  Advisory  Council  on  Americanization 
to  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Education,  the  Secretary  of 
the  Interior  called  a  conference  on  Americanization  as  a  War 
Measure,  in  Washington,  April  3,  1918.^^  Franklin  K.  Lane, 
Secretary  of  the  Interior,  presided,  and  the  attendance  in- 
cluded governors.  State  officers,  representatives  of  National 
and  State  Councils  of  Defence,  educators,  representatives  of 
industries,  Chambers  of  Commerce,  and  other  associations. 

In  his  opening  address.  Secretary  Lane  pointed  out  that 
a  democracy  must  have  a  ''self-protecting  sense  as  well  as  a 
creative  spirit;"  that  while  the  theory  of  our  government 
repudiates  paternalism,  we  should  not  bestow  freedom  and 
equal  opportunity  upon  the  newcomers  to  our  shores  without 
teaching  what  these  terms  mean ;  finally,  that  the  significance 
of  the  word  Americanization  should  be  interpreted  in  terms 
of  help,  sympathy,  largeness  of  view,  the  largest  of  human 
fellowship,  and  that  it  should  be  translated  into  terms  of 
wages  and  living  conditions  of  men.*^*  Before  the  initial 
meeting  was  brought  to  a  close.  Secretary  Lane  introduced 
the  question :  "Should  a  policy  of  Federal  aid  for  American- 
ization be  adopted  ?"^^  In  order  to  frame  a  definite  program 
in  response  to  this  and  other  pertinent  questions,  a  committee 
of  nine  was  appointed.  When  the  conference  reassembled, 
Governor  Stewart  of  Montana  reported  for  the  committee  as 
follows : 

1.  We  recommend  the  adoption  of  the  policy  that  the 
Federal  Government  should  co-operate  with  the  States,  and 
through  the  States  with  the  local  communities  in  carrying 
on  an  extended,  intensive,  and  immediate  Americanization  pro- 
gram, including  education  in  every  possible  way,  especially 
for  non-English  speaking  foreign-born  adults. 

2.  That  the  industries  employing  large  numbers  of  non- 
English  speaking  foreign-born  should  co-operate  with  the 
local  community,  State  and  Federal  Governments  in  carrying 
out  this  proposition. 

3.  That  adequate  appropriations  should  be  provided  by 
the  Congress  to  be  expended  through  appropriate  govern- 
mental agencies  for  these  purposes. 

4.  That  in  all  schools  in  which  elementary  subjects  are 
taught,  the  English  language  alone  shall  be  used.^® 

"  Americanization   as   a    War    Measure,    Bulletin    No.    18,    U.    S.    Bureau    of    Edu- 
cation, 1918,  p.    5. 
^Ibid.,    pp.    13-14. 
''Ibid.,  p.  29. 
»  Ibid.,   p.   36. 


20  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

To  carry  out  the  purpose  of  these  recommendations,  a 
resoliution  was  offered  by  Governor  Manning  of  South  Caro- 
lina the  main  feature  of  which  was  to  appoint  a  committee  to 
ask  a  hearing  before  a  joint  session  of  the  Senate  and  House 
Committees  on  Education  for  the  purpose  of  "furthering  legis- 
lation that  will  give  Federal  direction  and  leadership  to  the 
movement  for  teaching  the  English  language  to  the  illiterates 
and  non-English  speaking  persons  of  foreign  origin  residing 
in  the  United  States,  and  which  will  promote,  through  the 
public  schools,  the  systematic  instruction  of  such  persons  in 
American  ideals,  standards,  and  citizenship."  ^^  In  this  con- 
ference, then,  we  may  discern  a  progressive  step  in  the 
Americanization  movement,  and  its  crystallization  into  a 
measure  of  Federal  interest. 

The  principal  features  of  the  Americanization  Bill  may 
be  summarized  as  follows: 

1.  Co-operation  with  the  several  States  is  to  be  directed 
through  the  Bureau  of  Education. 

2.  The  sum  of  $5,000,000  is  appropriated  for  the  first 
year's  work,  and  annually  thereafter  until  the  end  of  the  fiscal 
year  ending  June  30,  1923,  the  sum  of  $12,500,000  is  appro- 
priated. 

3.  $500,000  may  be  expended  annually  for  administra- 
tion and  research. 

4.  The  balance  of  the  appropriation  is  to  be  allotted  to 
the  several  States  "in  the  ratio  which  the  number  of  resident 
illiterates  and  other  persons  unable  to  understand,  speak, 
read,  or  write  the  English  language,  sixteen  years  of  age  and 
over,  bears  to  the  number  of  resident  illiterates  and  other 
persons  unable  to  understand,  speak,  read,  or  write  the  Eng- 
lish language,  sixteen  years  of  age  and  over,  within  con- 
tinental United  States,  exclusive  of  the  District  of  Columbia 
and  the  Territory  of  Alaska,  according  to  the  last  published 
United  States  census." 

5.  In  order  to  avail  itself  of  the  money  appropriation, 
each  State  must  through  its  legislature  (a)  accept  the  pro- 
visions of  the  Act ;  (b)  authorize  its  department  of  education 
or  chief  school  officer  to  co-operate  with  the  United  States 
in  the  work  authorized  in  the  Act;  (c)  appropriate  for  the 
purposes  of  the  Act  an  amount  equal  to  that  allotted  to  the 
State  by  the  United  States;  (d)  require,  under  penalty,  all 
residents  who  are  citizens  of  the  United  States,  sixteen  years 
of  age  or  over  and  under  twenty-one  years  of  age,  and  all 
residents  of  more  than  six  months  who  are  aliens,  sixteen 


^■f  Ibid.,  p.  43. 


An  Exmnination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  21 

years  of  age  or  over  and  under  forty-five  years  of  age,  who 
are  illiterate  or  unable  to  understand,  speak,  read,  or  write 
the  English  language,  to  attend  classes  of  instruction  for  not 
less  than  two  hundred  hours  per  annum  until  they  shall  have 
completed  a  specified  course  approved  by  the  Secretary  of 
the  Interior ;  (e)  provide,  as  far  as  possible,  subject  to  the  ap- 
proval of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  for  the  education  of 
residents  of  twenty-one  or  over  who  are  citizens  of  the  United 
States,  and  of  resident  aliens  over  forty-five  who  are  illiter- 
ate ;  (f)  require  the  preparation  and  submission  to  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Interior,  annually,  of  rules  and  regulations  de- 
signed to  enforce  the  provisions  of  the  State  law  and  the 
rules  and  regulations  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior;  and 
(g)  submit  annually  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  a  report 
which  shall  show  (1)  the  plan  for  administration  and  super- 
vision, (2)  courses  of  study,  (3)  methods  and  kind  of  in- 
struction, (4)  equipment,  (5)  qualifications  of  teachers,  sup- 
ervisors, directors  of  education,  etc.,  (6)  plans  for  the  prep- 
aration of  teachers,  supervisors,  etc.,  and  (7)  receipts  and 
expenditures  of  money  for  the  preceding  fiscal  year. 

6.  The  Secretary  of  the  Interior  may  withhold  the  allot- 
ment to  any  state  whenever  he  determines  that  any  portions 
of  the  sums  allotted  are  not  being  applied  for  the  purposes 
of  the  Act. 

7.  The  Secretary  of  the  Interior  shall  make  such  rules 
and  regulations  as  may  be  necessary  to  carry  out  the  pur- 
poses of  this  Act,  and  may  co-operate  with  any  department  or 
agency  of  the  Government  and  request  such  agencies  to  co- 
operate with  him  and  with  the  several  States. 

While  this  bill  represents  an  earnest  effort  on  the  part 
of  its  supporters  to  realize  an  adequate  and  effective  program 
of  Americanization,  it  has  been  criticised  from  several  angles. 
On  the  one  hand  there  are  those  who  are  avowedly  hostile  to 
any  movement  involving  the  transfer  of  the  educational  bur- 
den from  the  States  to  the  Federal  Government ;  on  the  other 
hand  are  those  who  discern  weaknesses  in  the  bill  or  object  to 
its  modus  operandi. 

In  the  brochure  "Arguments  Submitted  in  connection 
with  a  Referendum  on  Proposed  Federal  Legislation  Provid- 
ing for  the  Creation  of  a  Department  of  Education  and  Fed- 
eral Aid  for  Education,'^^  it  is  stated:  "More  than  any  other 
educational  measure,  this  one  (the  Kenyon  Bill)  places  full 
control  of  this  large  national  undertaking  in  the  hands  of  a 
Washington    department.      The    Secretary    of    the    Interior 


■•  Pamphlet,    American    Council    on    Education,    Washing^n,    pp.    11-12. 


22  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

through  the  Bureau  of  Education  is  charged  with  formulat- 
ing the  courses  of  study  to  be  used  throughout  the  States, 
with  the  approval  of  State  plans,  with  prescribing  standards 
and  with  supervision.  He  is  authorized  to  withhold  appro- 
priations if  local  arrangements  are  not  satisfactory  to  him. 
It  is  not  the  leadership  of  an  office  equipped  to  investigate 
the  subject  and  bring  to  bear  upon  it  the  best  thought  of  the 
country  that  is  provided  for,  but  rather  a  scheme  of  bureau- 
cratic domination.  While  the  amount  of  money  involved  in 
the  Kenyon  Bill  is  small,  the  principle  is  judged  by  its  op- 
ponents to  be  dangerous  in  the  extreme."  Moreover,  the  op- 
ponents of  Federal  subsidy  as  provided  in  the  bill  insist  that 
the  principle  of  dollar  for  dollar  appropriations  is  not  to  be 
accepted  as  valid ;  the  motive  appealed  to  is  a  low  one ;  States 
are  induced  to  give  merely  in  order  to  share  Federal  moneys ; 
and  finally  "the  device  is  on  trial.  It  has  caused  endless  fric- 
tion in  some  quarters.  Up-to-date  it  has  been  a  very  dubious 
success."*^® 

The  supporters  of  the  bill  insist  that  the  States  have 
failed  to  remove  illiteracy  or  to  provide  adequately  for 
Americanization,  and  that  therefore  it  has  become  a  national 
obligation.®*^  It  is  maintained,  moreover,  that  citizens  are 
citizens  not  merely  of  States  or  local  communities,  but  citi- 
zens of  the  nation  as  well,  and  that  it  is  of  vital  importance  to 
the  nation  that  all  of  its  citizens  be  sufficiently  intelligent  to 
discharge  the  full  duties  of  citizenship,  and  that  all  of  the 
nation's  wealth  should  be  taxed  in  order  to  equalize  educa- 
tional opportunities  in  all  of  its  parts.  The  condition  that  the 
States  match  dollar  for  dollar  is  defended  on  the  ground  that 
"by  this  means  local  responsibility  is  preserved  and  the  small- 
er divisions  of  the  nation  are  compelled  to  make  a  reasonable 
provision  for  education."**^ 

It  should  be  noted  in  passing  that  several  other  Ameri- 
canization measures  are  still  pending  in  Congress.  The  Ves- 
tal Bill,  H.  R.  6959,  corresponds  to  the  Kenyon  Bill ;  the  chief 
point  of  difference  lies  in  the  financial  provisions  of  the  form- 
er which  limits  the  appropriation  to  $4,100,000.  The  John- 
son Bill,  H.  R.  9,  which  is  designated  mainly  to  amend  the  ex- 
isting naturalization  laws,  authorizes  the  Division  of  Citizen- 
ship Training  of  the  Bureau  of  Naturalization  to  promote  the 
civic  education  of  candidates  for  citizenship.  (Sec.  16).  To 
carry  on  this  work,  $300,000  is  to  be  appropriated  annually  in 
addition  to  the  customary  amounts  allotted  for  positions  in 
the  Division  of  Citizenship  Training. 

>>•  Ibid.,  p.  6. 
•«Ibid.,  p.  11. 
"  Ibid.,    pp.    4-5. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  ^ 

The  Fish  Resolution,  H.  R.  72 

The  Fish  Resolution,  which  is  one  of  the  less  conspic- 
uous Americanization  measures,  was  introduced  in  the  House, 
April,  1921.  This  resolution  would  require  firstly,  that  Con- 
gress "recommend  to  every  State  in  the  Union  that  it  enact 
into  law  immediately  measures  to  the  end  that  the  English 
language  be  the  controlling  medium  in  our  elementary  and 
high  schools  and  schools  of  high  school  standing,  both  pub- 
lic and  private,  and  that  all  such  schools  shall  be  required  to 
teach  at  least  one  year  of  American  history  and  civil  govern- 
ment and  all  pupils  attending  such  schools  shall  attend  upon 
these  studies,"  and  secondly,  that  "every  college  and  uni- 
versity of  the  United  States,  both  public  and  private,  be  re- 
quired to  give  merited  credit  for  these  subjects  in  their  en- 
trance examinations." 

Since  the  war,  the  States  have  taken  the  initiative  in 
makng  English  the  basic  language  of  instruction  in  all 
schools  public  and  private.  In  general,  the  colleges  and  uni- 
versities have  not  been  unwilling  to  give  due  credit  for 
American  history  and  civics  in  their  entrance  examinations. 
In  view  of  thi^  fact,  the  passing  of  the  second  feature  of  the 
resolution  would  involve  an  unmerited  reprimand  to  our 
higher  institutions  of  learning.  Without  doubt,  many  in 
sympathy  with  the  purpose  of  the  resolution  would  oppose 
it  on  principle,  believing  that  it  would  provide  a  precedent 
for  Congressional  dictation  in  matters  aflPecting  higher  edu- 
cation. 

The  Fess  Bill,  H.  R.  25      / 

The  object  of  the  Fess  Bill  is  "to  create  a  national  uni- 
versity at  the  seat  of  the  Federal  Government,"  According 
to  Section  2  of  the  bill,  its  purpose  is  threefoM : 

"First.  To  promote  the  advance  of  science,  pure  and 
applied,  and  of  the  liberal  and  fine  arts  by  original  investi- 
gation and  research  and  by  such  other  means  as  may  appear 
suitable  to  the  purpose  in  view. 

"Second.  To  provide  for  the  higher  instruction  and 
training  of  men  and  women  for  posts  of  importance  and  re- 
sponsibility in  the  public  service  of  State  or  Nation,  and  for 
the  practice  of  such  callings  and  professions  as  may  require 
for  their  worthy  pursuit  a  higher  training. 

"Third.  To  co-operate  with  the  scientific  departments 
of  the  Federal  Government,  with  the  colleges  of  agriculture 
and  the  mechanic  arts  founded  upon  the  proceeds  of  the  Fed- 
eral land  grant  Act  of  1862,  with  the  State  universities,  and 
with  other  institutions  of  higher  learning." 


24  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

The  bill  further  provides:  "That  the  university  shall  con- 
fer no  academic  degrees."  (Sec.  4).  "That  the  university 
shall  be  governed  and  directed  by  a  board  of  trustees  in  co- 
operation with  an  advisory  council."  (Sec.  5).  "That  the 
board  of  trustees  shall  consist  of  the  Commissioner  of  Edu- 
cation of  the  United  States  and  twelve  additional  members 
appointed  by  the  President  of  the  United  States  for  a  term 
of  twelve  years."  (Sec.  6).  "That  the  advisory  council  shall 
consist  of  one  representative  from  each  State  in  the  Union. 
The  representative  from  each  State  shall  be  the  president 
or  acting  president  of  they  State  university  in  case  there  be 
a  State  university  in  said  State;  if  not,  the  governor  of  the 
State  may  appoint  a  citizen  of  the  State,  learned  and  experi- 
enced in  matters  of  education,  to  represent  said  State  in  the 
advisory  council."  (Sec.  7). 

In  order  to  fulfil  the  terms  of  the  bill  and  facilitate  thor- 
ough investigation,  the  various  Federal  museums,  libraries, 
bureaus,  observatories  and  departments  of  expert  research 
shall  be  open  for  the  use  of  graduate  students.  The  bill  car- 
ries an  appropriation  of  $500,000. 

The  proposition  to  create  a  national  university  is  not 
new ;  in  fact,  it  may  be  traced  to  the  beginnings  of  the  Repub- 
lic. The  idea  was  especially  dear  to  Washington.  In  his 
first  message  to  Congress  he  referred  to  it,  and  "in  his  will  he 
gave  fifty  shares  in  the  Potomac  Company  toward  the  endow- 
ment of  such  an  institution,  provided  Congress  should  'incline 
a  fostering  hand  toward  it'."®^  The  statesmen  of  Washing- 
ton's day,  however,  were  not  profoundly  stirred  in  this  direc- 
tion. In  an  address  to  the  Legislature  of  Maryland  in  1798, 
the  Reverend  Samuel  Knox  insisted  that  "the  manner  in 
wjhich  the  subject  of  instituting  a  National  University  passed 
through  the  great  legislative  council  of  the  nation"  was  abun- 
dant testimony  of  the  lack  of  educational  zeal  on  the  part  of 
the  country .^^  Washington  did  not  doubt  the  power  of  Con- 
gress to  maintain  a  university,  but  this  view  was  not  held 
by  Jefferson  and  the  "strict  constructionists."  Of  recent  de- 
cades, however,  the  question  of  the  desirability  rather  than 
the  constitutionality  of  creating  a  national  University  has  be- 
come the  chief  source  of  argument.  (Note).  In  the  report 
of  the  Committee  on  the  National  University  Project  issued 

"  Cyclopedia  of  Education,    New   York,    1913,    "National    University." 

•"Knox,   Samuel,  op.  cit.,  p.  32. 

Note:  An  excellent  presentation  of  arguments  on  "The  Constitutionality  of  a 
National  University"  is  given  in  the  report  by  Edmund  L.  James,  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  Chicago,  printed  in  the  Report  of  the  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Educa- 
tion, 1898-99,  Vol.  I,  pp.  662-671.  The  opinion  of  James  is  that  "there  is  a  dis- 
tinct grant  in  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  to  the  Federal  Govern- 
ment to  establish  and  maintain  a  national  university."  This  opinion  is  based  on 
five  distinct  grounds. 


An  Excmunation  of  the  Federalization  Movement  25 

in  1899  under  the  auspices  of  the  National  Educational  Asso- 
ciation, it  was  held  that  "the  Government  is  not  called  upon 
to  maintain  at  the  capital  a  university  in  the  ordinary  sense 
of  the  term,"  and  the  general  principle  was  laid  down  that 
**it  has  been,  and  is,  one  of  the  recognized  functions  of  the 
Federal  Government  to  encourage  and  aid  but  not  to  con- 
trol, the  educational  instrumentalities  of  the  country."®*  In 
the  opinion  of  the  committee  it  was  advisable  to  study  the 
opportunities  for  advanced  research  afforded  by  the  Govern- 
ment, and  to  see  in  what  measure  existing  institutions  wouM 
be  able  to  co-operate  to  this  end  with  the  Smithsonian  Insti- 
tution. 

The  year  1907  witnessed  a  concerted  movement  in  behalf 
of  a  national  university.  During  that  year  a  powerful  appeal 
was  made  to  Congress  by  the  National  University  Committee 
of  Four  Hundred,  and  the  National  Association  of  State  Uni- 
versities endorsed  the  project  by  an  almost  unanimous  vote. 
Likewise  the  N.  E.  X.  has  supported  the  measure,  and  ever 
since  1901  has  afforded  it  encouragement  and  sympathy.  It 
has  been  generally  assumed  that  the  university  should  be  of 
graduate  character  and  that  it  should  depend  largely  upon  the 
many  facilities  for  research  that  are  available  in  the  various 
government  bureaus  and  departments.  Accordingly  the  con- 
viction has  prevailed  that  the  national  university  should  in 
no  wise  undertake  the  functions  or  encroach  upon  the  sphere 
of  existing  institutions,  and  the  provisions  of  the  Fess  Bill 
are  evidently  calculated  to  avoid  any  such  friction. 

The  chief  advantage  of  a  national  university  as  provided 
in  this  bill  would  lie  in  the  equipment  of  experts  for  the  pub- 
lic service  of  State  or  Nation.  It  is  believed,  moreover,  that 
it  would  lift  research  under  government  auspices  to  a  higher 
and  more  intensive  plane  than  that  on  which  it  is  now  carried 
on  in  the  various  federal  bureaus  and  departments. 

The  Fletcher  BiU,  S.  622 

The  Fletcher  Bill  proposes  the  establishment  of  a  "Na- 
tional Conservatory  of  Music  for  the  education  of  pupils  in 
music  in  all  its  branches,  vocal  and  instrumental."  The  con- 
servatory is  to  be  fostered  and  maintained  by  the  Federal 
Government,  and  is  to  be  supplemented  when  practicable  by 
branches  in  various  sections  of  the  country.  Control  is  vested 
in  a  general  board  of  regents,  consisting  of  the  President,  the 
Vice-president,  the  Speaker  of  the  House,  the  Chairman  of 
the  Committee  on  Education  of  the  Senate  and  the  Chairman 
of  the  Committee  on  Education  of  the  House  of  Representa- 

•*Annual  Report,  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Education,  189>8-99,  Vol.  I,  p.  661. 


26  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

tives.  In  addition  to  the  board  of  regents,  the  plan  of  ad- 
ministration calls  for  an  advisory  board  of  directors  consist- 
ing of  fifteen  members,  and  a  dean  of  the  faculty  of  the  con- 
servatory. 

The  first  duty  of  the  director  general  shall  be  to  make 
a  survey  and  research  of  musical  conditions  and  deeds  in  the 
United  States ;  he  is  to  prepare  plans  for  the  organization  and 
equipment  of  said  conservatory,  and  report  to  the  board  of 
regents,  who  in  turn  shall  report  to  Congress  with  their 
recommendations,  and  suggest  the  necessary  appropriation. 
One  of  the  principal  aims  of  the  conservatory  is  to  "co-oper- 
ate eflFectively  with  organizations  and  groups  who  are  en- 
deavoring to  promote  music  in  any  line,  in  community  work, 
in  schools,  or  in  aiding  American  composers,  artists,  and  mu- 
sicians in  general,  in  order  to  encourage  musical  education  in 
this  country."  In  addition,  plans  are  to  be  prepared  whereby 
music  may  be  brought  into  the  rural  districts  and  rural  life 
made  more  attractive. 

The  conservatory  is  to  have  a  curriculum  of  studies,  and 
is  to  enjoy  the  power  to  grant  degrees  or  diplomas.  To  carry 
out  the  initial  work  of  organization,  an  appropriation  of 
$50,000  is  authorized. 

The  introduction  of  the  Sheppard  Bill  shows  how  varied 
are  the  present  demands  upon  the  Government,  and  how 
general  is  the  tendency  to  resort  to  the  Federal  Government 
for  leadership  and  support  in  the  furtherance  of  educational 
and  cultural  interests.  This  bill  at  once  invites  the  question 
whether  or  not  patronage  of  music  rightly  fall's  within  the 
sphere  of  national  interest.  If  musical  education  is  regarded 
a  national  problem,  it  becomes  extremely  difficult  to  deter- 
mine the  boundaries  of  governmental  action,  and  it  inevita- 
bly follows  that  federal  leadership  and  support  becomes  equal- 
ly admissible  along  many  other  lines  of  social  and  artistic 
endeavor. 

The  Tillman  Bill,  H.  R.  4129 

Of  recent  years  students  of  rural  sociology  have  persist- 
ently pointed  out  that  one  of  the  gravest  educational  issues 
facing  the  country  is  the  rural  school  problem,  especially  in 
the  mpuntain  districts  of  the  South.  In  an  effort  to  amelior- 
ate conditions,  the  Tillman  Bill  to  create  the  "National  Board 
of  Rural'  Industrial  Schools  for  Mountain  Children"  was  in- 
troduced in  the  House,  April  1921. 

The  duty  of  the  board  shall  be  to  investigate  the  educa- 
tional needs  of  the  remote  and  less  favored  mountain  sections 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  27 

of  the  United  States,  and  then  to  "establish  and  maintain, 
preferably  in  widely  scattered  mountain  sections,  twenty  in- 
dustrial schools  for  mountain  children  of  both  sexes,  at  which 
schools  shall  be  taught  the  common  and  high  school  branches, 
military  science  and  tactics  and  all  other  branches  recom- 
mended and  agreed  upon  b}^  said  board  with  special  reference 
to  instruction  in  domestic  science,  farming,  road  engineering, 
and  scientific  and  industrial  education."  The  bill  carries  an 
appropriation  of  $300,000. 

This  bill,  although  intended  for  a  worthy  purpose,  would 
continue  a  step  farther  Federal  control  of  education  in  the 
States.  Granting  the  necessity  of  Federal  action  to  provide 
education  in  the  mountain  sections,  it  seems  unwise  to  create 
a  new  Federal  Board  to  administer  the  Act.  The  tasks  out- 
lined in  the  bill  might  well  be  referred  to  the  Rural  School 
Division  of  the  Bureau  of  Education,  or  else  to  the  Federal 
Board  for  Vocational  Education,  since  industrial  education  is 
the  chief  aim  of  the  measure.  Under  existing  statutes,  the 
educational  eflFort  of  the  Federal  Government  is  carried  on  by 
too  many  distinct  and  isolated  boards,  bureaus,  and  depart- 
ments. Hence,  the  creation  of  a  new  educational  board  is 
highly  undesirable.  If  the  Federal  Government  is  obliged  to 
assume  the  responsibilities  implied  in  the  Tillman  Bill,  a 
more  practicable  plan  of  operation  should  be  found. 

The  Raker  Bill,  H.  R.  4116 

The  Raker  Bill  proposes  to  enlarge  the  function  of  the 
Bureau  of  Education.  Its  object  is  to  "make  accessible  to  all 
the  people  the  valuable  scientific  and  other  research  work  con- 
ducted by  the  United  States  through  the  establishment  of  a 
national  school  of  correspondence."  Under  the  bill  it  be- 
comes the  duty  of  the  Commissioner  of  Education  "to  formu- 
late a  plan  or  plans  whereby  the  publications  of  the  various 
departments  and  bureaus  of  the  Government  shall  be  properly 
classified  and  lists  thereof  be  published  for  free  distribution, 
and  to  cause  instruction  by  correspondence  to  be  carried  on 
with  all  persons,  bona  fide  residents  of  the  United  States,  who 
may  apply  therefor,  and  without  charge,  except  such  publi- 
cations as  any  such  persons  shall  desire  to  purchase  and  which 
shall  be  supplied  to  them  at  actual'  cost." 

It  is  generally  conceded  that  large  numbers  of  American 
citizens  are  unaware  of  the  vast  amount  of  literature  pub- 
lished annually  by  the  Government.  At  present  the  various 
bureaus  and  departments  issue  independent  lists  of  available 
publications,  and  while  composite  lists  are  as  yet  unobtain- 
able for  general'  publication,  it  is  apparent  that  any  plan  that 


28  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

would  inform  the  public  mind  concerning  these  publications 
is  to  be  cordially  welcomed.  To  the  vast  army  of  teachers 
throughout  the  country  they  should  prove  an  especial  boon. 

With  regard  to  the  correspondence  instruction  provided 
by  the  Raker  Bill,  no  definite  mode  of  procedure  is  given. 
The  plans  are  to  be  devised  by  the  Commissioner  of  Educa- 
tion, and  requests  for  such  appropriations  as  may  be  neces- 
sary to  carry  out  the  measure  are  to  be  submitted  annually  to 
Congress.  The  importance  of  the  Bureau  of  Education  as  a 
national  correspondence  school  would  depend  on  many  fac- 
tors. It  is  conceivable  that  under  certain  circumstances  it 
might  become  a  very  unwieldy  agency,  due  to  the  nation- 
wide scope  of  its  work.  At  present  correspondence  school 
education  is  being  successfully  conducted  by  many  of  the 
State  universities  and  other  local  agencies  in  various  parts 
of  the  country. 

The  Raker  Bill,  H.  R.  4385 

Like  the  bill  just  reviewed,  H.  R.  4385,  also  introduced 
by  Mr.  Raker,  aims  to  increase  the  influence  of  the  Bureau 
of  Education.  This  measure,  introduced  April,  1921,  provides 
for  the  creation  of  a  Division  of  Library  Service  in  the  Bu- 
reau, and  authorizes  the  payment  of  $8,100  annually  for  sal- 
aries of  experts  and  employes  connected  with  this  service. 
In  the  language  of  the  bill,  "it  shall  be  the  purpose  and  duty 
of  such  division  to  increase  the  efficiency  of  American  libraries 
by  providing  current  information  concerning  Government 
activities.  It  shall  collect  and  organize  information  regarding 
printed  matter  issued  by  the  Federal  Government,  and  shall 
make  available  to  the  libraries  of  the  United  States  the  sources 
of  such  information.  It  shall  provide  digests  of  this  ma- 
terial, with  suggestions,  as  to  its  use,  in  order  that  material 
may  be  made  quickly  available  to  users  of  libraries."  Another 
bill,  H.  R.  2458,  introduced  by  Mr.  Dallinger  contain  provi- 
sions identical  to  those  in  the  Raker  Bill. 

The  Capper  Bill,  S.  416 

The  Capper  Bill  provides  for  "the  promotion  of  physical 
education  in  the  United  States  through  co-operation  with  the 
States  in  the  preparation  and  payment  of  supervisors  and 
teachers  of  physical  education,  including  health  supervisors 
and  school  nurses,  to  appropriate  money  and  regulate  its  ex- 
penditure, and  for  other  purposes."  (Sec.  1).  Physical  edu- 
cation in  the  definition  of  the  bill  is  the  thorough  preparation 
of  "the  boys  and  girls  of  the  Nation  for  the  duties  and  re- 
sponsibilities of  citizenship  through  the  development  of  bod- 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  29 

ily  vigor  and  endurance,  muscular  strength  and  skill,  bodily 
and  mental  poise,  and  such  desirable  moral'  and  social  qual- 
ities as  courage,  self-control,  self-subordination,  co-operation 
under  leadership  and  disciplined  initiative."  (Sec.  2). 

An  initial  appropriation  of  $10,000,000  is  provided  for  the 
first  fiscal  year ;  for  each  subsequent  year  an  amount  sufficient 
to  allot  one  dollar  per  child  to  each  State  accepting  the  pro- 
visions of  the  Act  is  called  for.  (Sec.  3).  The  general  appro- 
priation is  to  be  allotted  in  the  proportion  which  the  popula- 
tion of  each  State  between  the  ages  of  six  and  eighteen  years 
bears  to  the  total  population  of  the  United  States  between 
those  years.  (Sec.  4).  For  the  administration  of  the  Act 
a  Division  of  Physical  Education  is  to  be  established  in  the 
Bureau  of  Education,  to  be  in  charge  of  a  director,  aided  by 
specialists  and  assistants.     (Sec.  5). 

According  to  the  Act,  the  Commissioner  of  Education, 
through  the  Division  of  Physical  Education  is  to  "make  and 
publish  recommendations  to  aid  the  States  in  carrying  out 
the  provisions  of  this  Act,  and  shall  make  or  cause  to  be 
made  studies,  demonstrations,  and  reports  to  aid  the  States 
in  the  organization  and  conduct  of  physical  education  in  ele- 
mentary, secondary,  continuation  and  normal  schools  and  in 
other  institutions  of  higher  learning."  (Sec.  6).  He  is  also 
required  to  co-operate  with  such  bureaus  and  agencies  of  the 
Federal  Government  as  may  have  relations  with  the  physical 
education  of  children  of  school  age.  (Sec.  7).  For  adminis- 
tration and  investigation  the  sum  of  $300,000  is  to  be  allotted 
annually  to  the  Bureau  of  Education.  (Sec.  8). 

It  is  provided  further  that  the  United  States  Public 
Health  Service  shall  co-operate  with  the  Division  of  Physical 
Education  of  the  Bureau  of  Education,  by  making  "studies, 
investigations,  and  demonstrations  relating  to  the  health  su- 
pervision of  children  of  school  age  and  the  sanitation  of 
school  buildings,  equipment  and  grounds."  (Sec.  9).  To 
carry  out  the  provisions  of  Section  9,  the  Public  Health  Ser- 
vice is  to  receive  $200,000  annually.  (Sec.  10). 

Each  State  accepting  the  Act  must  designate  the  State's 
chief  educational  authority  who  will  represent  the  State  in 
the  administration  of  the  Act.  No  Federal  moneys  are  to  be 
turned  over  to  the  State  for  the  payment  of  supervisors  and 
teachers  of  physical  education  until  that  State  shall  have 
established  a  satisfactory  system  for  the  preparation  of  super- 
visors and  teachers.  Within  five  years  after  the  acceptance  of 
the  Act,  each  State  shall  make  provision  for  the  physical 
education  of  all  children  between  the  ages  of  six  and  eighteen 


30  The  Federal  Gozernment  and  Education 

years.  No  money  shall  be  apportioned  to  any  State  from 
the  funds  provided  in  Section  3  of  this  Act  unless  a  sum 
equally  as  large  be  provided  by  the  State  or  local  authori- 
ties or  by  both  for  the  same  purposes.  (Sec.  11). 

The  State  authority  is  to  present  to  the  Commissioner 
of  Education  ''plans  showing  how  and  for  what  objects"  it 
is  proposed  to  use  the  appropriation  allotted.  These  plans 
must  show  that  the  State  is  prepared  to  carry  out  the  pro- 
visions of  this  Act,  else  the  funds  are  not  apportioned  to  the 
State.  (Sec.  12).  To  benefit  by  the  Act,  it  must  be  made 
clear  to  the  Commissioner  of  Education  that  the  State  in  its 
plan  of  organization  of  physical  education  "shall  provide  that 
such  physical  education  is  planned  to  meet  the  needs  of  all 
of  the  children  of  the  State  from  six  to  eighteen  years  of  age, 
inclusive ;  and  that  the  State,  county,  district,  or  local  author- 
ity or  any  combination  of  these  shall  provide  such  play- 
grounds, athletic  fields,  gymnasia  as  are  locally  necessary 
for  a  well  rounded  course  of  physical  education."  (Sec.  13). 
The  Commissioner  of  Education  is  authorized  "to  prescribe 
plans  for  keeping  accounts  of  the  expenditure  of  such  funds 
as  may  be  apportioned  to  the  States  under  the  provisions  of 
this  Act  and  to  audit  such  accounts."  (Sec.  14).  The  Com- 
missioner may  withhold  the  apportionment  of  any  State  for 
the  next  ensuing  fiscal  year  if  the  current  apportionment  is 
not  being  spent  according  to  the  provisions  of  the  Act.  (Sec. 
16).  The  Commissioner  is  required  to  report  to  Congress  an- 
nually on  the  administration  of  the  Act.  (Sec.  17). 

Taking  cognizance  of  the  alarming  percentage  of  men 
found  physically  deficient  in  the  draft  examinations  in  the 
recent  war,  the  Capper  Bill  aims  to  prevent  the  possibility 
of  witnessing  the  rise  of  another  generation  similarly  de- 
ficient. "In  the  first  national  army  draft  in  1917,  when  the 
physical  standards  were  kept  high,  thirty-four  per  cent  of  the 
men  between  twenty-one  and  thirty-one  years  of  age  were 
found  unfit  for  general  military  service.  This  is  an  indict- 
ment directly  of  the  society  in  which  these  men  had  grown 
to  maturity,  and  indirectly  of  the  health  service  which  has 
been  offered  in  our  public  school  system Society  can- 
not afford  to  have  boys  and  girls  grow  into  manhood  and 
womanhood  physically  inefficient  if  it  is  possible  to  remove 
the  defect  or  to  give  the  opportunity  for  normal  development 

The  greatest  source  of  wealth  in  any  community  is 

to  be  found  in  the  normal  physical  development  of  boys  and 
girls.  The  individual  training  which  is  provided  in  our 
schools  can  mean  little  without  a  sound   basis  in  physical 


An  Exaiimiation  of  the  Federal iBation  Movement  31 

well-being."'^'  On  the  principle,  therefore,  that  the  future  of 
the  nation  depends  upon  the  development  of  sturdy  men  and 
women,  sufficiently  strong  to  meet  the  responsibilities  of 
peace  and  to  serve  the  common  good  in  time  of  war,  physical 
education  has  become  a  national  problem.  Hence  the  com- 
prehensive and  detailed  program  embodied  in  the  Capper 
Bill. 

This  bill  embodies  the  familiar  subsidy  principles  seen 
in  the  Smith-Hughes  Act  and  in  the  Kenyon  Bill.  To  dis- 
arm certain  critics  of  the  bill  who  opposed  it  during  the  66th 
Congress,  the  bill  was  carefully  revised  with  the  result  that 
in  the  new  bill  the  rights  of  the  States  to  supervise  and  ad- 
minister their  facilities  for  physical  education  are  more  care- 
fully defined,  and  that  the  parent  may,  if  he  desires,  object 
to  the  compulsory  medication  of  his  child. 

Although  the  revised  bill  is  free  from  many  of  the  objec- 
tionable features  of  the  earlier  measure,  it  is  believed  that 
the  pending  bill  gives  to  the  Bureau  of  Education  what  may 
amount  to  complete  control  over  the  activities  of  the  States 
in  the  work  of  physical  education.  Excepting  the  Sterling- 
Towner  Bill,  the  Capper  Bill  is  the  most  far-reaching  educa- 
tional measure  now  pending  in  Congress.  The  Sterling- 
Towner  Bill,  it  should  be  added,  includes  a  physical  education 
clause  and  authorizes  as  much  as  $20,000,000  annually  for 
that  purpose.  It  is  believed  by  many  that  the  Capper  Bill 
serves  as  an  excellent  substitute  for  a  plan  of  compulsory 
military  training,  with  the  added  advantage  that  it  would 
provide  appropriate  physical  direction  for  girls  as  well  as 
boys. 

THE  OWEN  BILL,  S.  523. 

The  purpose  of  the  0\Ven  Bill  is  to  create  a  Department 
of  Education.  This  measure  was  originally  introduced  in  the 
first  session  of  the  65th  Congress,  April  4,  1917,  and  failing 
of  action  in  that  session  and  the  subsequent  one,  was  again 
introduced  in  the  67th  Congress,  April  12,  1921.  It  provides 
for  a  Secretary  of  Education  in  the  President's  Cabinet,  and 
an  Assistant  Secretary.  The  present  Bureau  of  Education  is 
to  be  transferred  to  the  proposed  Department  and  to  remain 
under  its  jurisdiction.  According  to  Section  5,  the  province 
and  duty  of  the  proposed  Department  of  Education  is  "to 
collect,  classify,  and  disseminate  information  and  advice  on 
all  phases  of  education  and  through  co-operation  with  State, 
county,  district,  and  municipal  education  officers  to  promote, 


•»  Strayer  and   Engelhardt,  The  Classroom,  Teacher,  New  York.  1920,  pp.   17-18. 


32  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

foster,     and  develop  advancement  and  improvement  in  the 
public  school  systems  throughout  the  United  States." 

While  the  Owen  Bill  aims  to  give  education  new  dignity- 
through  the  raising  of  the  Government's  chief  educational  of- 
fice to  Cabinet  rank,  it  is  not  a  centralization  measure.  It 
contains  no  provisions  for  federal  control  of  education  in  the 
States;  it  does  not  attempt  to  co-ordinate  the  many  educa- 
tional offices  of  the  Government  under  its  general  direction; 
and  finally,  its  function  in  all  probability  would  not  apprec- 
iably transcend  that  of  the  present  Bureau  of  Education.  Ac- 
cording to  a  recent  criticism,  "this  bill  might,  with  propriety, 
have  been  introduced  at  any  time  within  the  past  twenty-five 
years.  This  is  another  way  of  saying  that  it  does  not  ade- 
quately meet  the  situation  which  the  war  has  revealed."*® 

The  Husted  Resolution,  H.  J.  Res.  93. 

The  Husted  Joint  Resolution  provides  for  a  Commission 
on  Public  Education  whose  duty  shall  be  "to  inquire  into  the 
condition  of  public  education  in  the  several  States,  and  to 
recommend  such  measures  as  it  may  deem  advisable  for  the 
improvement  of  the  same."  According  to  Section  3  of  the 
resolution,  the  duty  of  the  commission  is  to  report  upon  the 
following  particular  subjects: 

1.  The  desirability  of  establishing  a  uniform  system  of 
public  education  throughout  the  United  States  under  Fed- 
eral regulation  and  control. 

2.  The  advantages,  if  any,  to  be  secured  through  Fed- 
eral legislation  of  uniform  application  throughout  the  United 
States  providing  for  compulsory  education,  registration  of 
children,  inspection  of  schools,  examination  and  licensing  of 
public-school  teachers,  and  supervision  of  teaching. 

3.  The  desirability  of  establishing  a  national  system  of 
military  education  and  training  in  the  public  schools,  acad- 
emies, colleges,  and  universities  in  the  United  States. 

4.  The  improvement  of  the  systems  of  public  education 
in  the  several  States  with  a  view  to  securing  better  and  more 
practical  educational  results. 

5.  The  desirability  of  providing  optional  subjects  in  edu- 
cational courses  in  colleges  and  universities  and  the  extent,  if 
any,  to  which  such  selection  should  be  permitted. 

6.  Such  constitutional  amendment,  legislation,  or  both 
such  constitutional  amendment  and  legislation,  as  may  be 
deemed  advisable  by  said  commission  and  necessary  to  carry 

"  Keith  and  Bagley,  The  Nation  and  the  Schools,  New  York,  1920,  p.  135. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  33 

into  effect  any  or  all  of  the  foregoing  particular  subjects  of 
ixivestigation. 

This  bill  represents  an  attempt  to  discover  a  working 
basis  on  which  to  construct  an  educational  policy  adapted  to 
the  genius  of  American  institutions  and  responding  to  the 
present  demands  in  education.  While  it  may  be  truly  said 
of  many  of  the  educational  bills  in  Congress  that  they  are 
not  derived  from  due  preliminary  investigation  of  the  situa- 
tion they  endeavor  to  remedy,  the  Husted  Resolution  on  the 
other  hand  "represents  an  approach  to  the  subject  of  Federal 
action  on  education  that  must  especially  commend  itself  to 
scientifically  trained  persons.  It  commits  the  country  to  noth- 
ing until  a  careful  study  has  been  made."*^ 

The  Kenyon  Bill,  S.  1607. 

One  of  the  outstanding  pledges  of  the  Republican  Party 
in  the  national  election  of  1920  was  the  promotion  of  the 
general  good  through  the  creation  of  a  Department  of  Public 
Welfare  with  a  Secretary  in  the  President's  Cabinet.  As  a 
preliminary  step  in  the  fulfillment  of  this  promise,  President 
Harding  in  his  message  to  Congress,  April  12,  1921,  urged 
that  steps  be  taken  to  redeem  the  pledge  of  the  administration. 
Pointing  to  the  importance  of  the  proposed  department,  he 
said :  "In  the  realms  of  education,  public  health,  sanitation, 
conditions  of  workers  in  industry,  child  welfare,  proper  amuse- 
ment and  recreation,  the  elimination  of  social  vice,  and  many 
other  subjects,  the  government  has  already  undertaken  a  con- 
siderable range  of  activities But  these  undertakings 

have  been  scattered  through  many  departments  and  bureaus 
without  co-ordination  and  with  much  overlapping  of  func- 
tions which  fritters  energies  and  magnifies  the  cost." 

In  pursuance  of  the  President's  program,  two  comprehen- 
sive bills  were  introduced  in  the  Senate  in  May,  1921.  One 
of  the  bills,  S.  1607,  was  introduced  by  Senator  Kenyon;  the 
other,  S.  1839,  by  Senator  McCormick.  These  bills  would 
abolish  the  present  Bureau  of  Education,  and  transfer  its 
functions  to  the  Department  of  Public  Welfare. 

Section  2  of  the  Kenyon  Bill  provides  that  there  shall  be 
in  the  Department  of  Public  Welfare  a  "Division  of  Educa- 
tion, which  under  the  general  supervision  of  the  Secretary, 
shall  have  charge  of  the  educational  functions  and  activities 
of  the  department  and  shall,  by  investigation,  publication, 
and  such  other  methods  as  may  be  authorized  by  Congress, 
promote  the  development  of  schools  and  other  educational 

«'  Ihe  hducational  Record,   Vol.    I,  No.   1,  p.   21. 


34  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

and  recreational  facilities  for  the  instruction  of  children  and 
illiterate  adults,  the  training  of  teachers,  and  the  American- 
ization of  those  persons  in  the  United  States  who  lack  knowl- 
edge of  our  language  or  institutions."  Co-ordinate  with  the 
Division  of  Education  would  be  a  Division  of  Public  Health, 
a  Division  of  Social  Service,  and  a  Division  of  Veteran 
Service. 

This  attempt  to  submerge  education  in  the  proposed  de- 
partment has  met  the  vigorous  opposition  of  many  educa- 
tors.^® They  insist  that  the  authors  of  the  bill  fail  to  recognize 
the  growing  demand  for  a  Department  of  Education,  and 
hence  insist  that  the  provisions  of  the  bill  relating  to  educa- 
tion be  deleted. 

The  bill  has  been  opposed  by  the  N.  E.  A.,  which  is  com- 
mitted to  the  support  of  the  Sterling-Towner  Bill.  While  the 
American  Council  on  Education  has  not  endorsed  the  Sterling- 
Towner  Bill,  it  has  declared  itself  by  referendum  overwhelm- 
ingly in  favor  of  a  Department  of  Education.®^ 

Various  attempts  have  been  made  to  conciliate  the  sup- 
porters of  the  Department  of  Education  by  calling  the  pro- 
posed welfare  department  the  "Department  of  Education  and 
Public  Welfare."  Whether  or  not  the  difficulty  will  be  solved 
in  this  manner  is  problematical.  Many  students  of  govern- 
mental functions  insist  that  in  the  regrouping  of  the  admin- 
istrative units  of  the  government,  each  Department  should  be 
uni-functional ;  that  is  to  say,  it  should  pursue  more  closely  a 
single  line  of  effort. 


«« Joint  Hearings  before  the  Committees  on  Education,  Congress  of  the  United 
States  67th  Congress,  1st  Session,  on  1607  and  H.  R.  5837,  Washington,  1921, 
p.   87   flF. 

•'The  Educational  Record,  Vol.  II,  No.  2,  April,  1921,  "The  Referendum  on  a 
Federal  I>cpartment  of  Education." 


CHAPTER  IV 

PENDING  LEGISLATION— THE  STERLING-TOWNER 
BILL,  S.  1252,  H.  R.  7. 

The  Sterling-Towner  Bill  is  the  most  conspicuous  and  com- 
prehensive educational  measure  that  has  been  introduced  into  the 
Congress  of  the  United  States  in  recent  decades.  On  all  sides  it 
is  a  current  topic  of  discussion,  and  it  has  elicited  a  degree  of  in- 
terest hitherto  unparalleled  in  the  history  of  educational  legislation 
in  America. 

The  bill  embodies  two  main  features :  first,  the  creation  of  a 
Department  of  Education,  and  secondly,  federal  appropriation  of 
large  sums  of  money  in  behalf  of  education  in  the  States.  It  may 
be  said  to  represent  the  concrete  embodiment  of  the  theory  that 
education  is  a  national  problem,  demanding  national  attention,  that 
State  action  is  insufficient,  and  that  national  participation  in  the 
work  of  education  is  a  fundamental  and  imperative  need. 

While  the  demand  for  far-reaching  collective  action  in  edu- 
cation is  not  without  a  long  historic  development,  it  has  become 
highly  significant  and  has  gained  tremendous  impetus  since  the 
World  War.  Never  before  have  the  unity  and  interdependence 
of  American  life  been  so  vividly  interpreted,  and  never  before  has 
the  American  conscience  been  so  keenly  aware  of  the  relation  of 
a  community  of  ideals  and  aspirations  to  the  national  welfare.  Due 
to  the  increasing  complexity  of  social  life,  problems  once  deemed 
local  and  parochial  are  now  being  regarded  in  the  light  of  a  larger 
social  vision.  New  needs  have  gradually  developed,  and  the  nation 
is  being  called  upon  to  assume  an  important  role  in  their  solution. 
It  is  insisted  that  the  individual  is  a  citizen  of  the  nation  as  well 
as  of  his  State,  and  that  since  the  welfare  of  the  nation  is  so  intimate- 
ly linked  wath  the  welfare  of  the  individual,  the  nation  must  co- 
operate in  the  development  of  its  members  to  the  fullness  of  their 
civic  stature.  To  this  end  educational  opportunities  throughout 
the  nation  should  be  equalized ;  the  civic  intelligence  of  the  citi- 
zens of  South  Carolina  or  Mississippi  should  not  fall  below  the 
minimum  standard  of  civic  and  social  efficiency  that  might  be  set 
for  the  nation  as  a  whole. 

The  war  gave  us  a  startling  revelation  of  the  deficiencies  of 
American  education.  The  foundations  of  democracy  were  de- 
clared in  danger,  and  the  conviction  gained  ground  that  something 
ought  to  be  done,  and  done  quickly.  The  first  prerequisite  to  the 
drafting  of  a  remedial  measure  was  a  study  of  the  problems  re- 

35 


36  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

vealed  by  the  war.  This  task  was  shared  by  the  Committee  on 
Federal  Legislation  of  the  American  Council  on  Education  and 
by  the  Emergency  Commission  of  the  National  Educational  Asso- 
ciation. The  former  Committee  is  the  outgrowth  of  a  special 
committee  of  the  American  Council  on  Education  which  was  ap- 
pointed at  a  meeting  held  in  Washington  January  30,  1918,  and 
which  resulted  in  the  organization  of  the  Emergency  Council  on 
Education/^  At  that  time  the  special  committee  supported  the 
Owen  Bill  for  a  Department  of  Education.  The  attitude  of  the 
committee  wias  expressed  in  the  following  statement  presented  to 
Senator  Smith  of  Georgia: 

"While  leaving  to  the  States  all  the  old  measure  of  autonomy, 
in  their  own  educational  systems,  it  will  be  necessary  to  provide 
some  central  and  general  agency  through  which  they  may  all  ex- 
press themselves  in  policies  which  are  either  national  or  interna- 
tional in  scope.  Since  education  is  universally  recognized  as  the 
first  corollary  of  demiocracy,  it  seems  incongruous  that  it  should 
not  be  recognized  as  of  equal  rank  in  the  councils  of  the  nation 
with  that  accorded  commerce,  labor  and  agriculture 

"Under  the  new  conditions  which  the  war  has  produced,  the 
supreme  importance  of  education  to  the  country  stands  out  more 
clearly  than  ever  before.  The  great  ideals  which  have  always 
been  in  the  minds  of  the  people  more  or  less  in  solution,  need  to 
be  crystallized  into  definite  form,  and  to  become  well  defined  di- 
recting motives  in  the  national  consciousness.  In  the  absence  of 
a  state  religion,  the  educational  organization  of  the  country  must 
be  the  means  of  placing  emphasis  on  the  great  moral  and  spiritual 
values  which  are  ultimately  the  determining  factors  in  a  nation's 
history.  By  the  enlightenment  which  it  spreads  and  the  emphasis 
which  it  places  on  the  great  moral  laws,  it  can  prove  a  large 
measure  of  salvation  in  a  shifting  social  and  economic  order  which 
we  are  inevitably  facing  at  the  end  of  the  war 

"The  nation's  ideals,  consciously  expressed  in  the  lives  of  its 
people,  determine  its  destiny.  As  Humbolt  has  said,  'What  we  de- 
sire in  the  government,  we  must  put  first  into  the  minds  of  the 
people  through  the  schools.' 

"These  are  some  of  the  considerations  which  seem  to  demand 
the  recognition  of  education  in  the  largest  and  most  dignified  way 
by  the  Government."^^ 

While  Senator  Smith,  the  Chairman  of  the  Senate  Commit- 
tee on  Education  and  Labor,  was  impressed  with  the  committee's 
program,  he  maintained  that  a  broader  measure  than  the  Owen 

"i^The  Educational  Record,  Vol.  I,  No.  3,  p.  91. 

"  Joint  Hearings  Before  the  Committees  on  Education  and  Labor,  Congress  of  the 
United  States,  Sixty-sixth  Session,  on  S.  1017,  H.  R.  7,  July  22,  1919,  Washing- 
ton, 1920,  p.  156. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  37 

Bill  was  needed  in  order  to  win  the  support  of  Congress  and  to 
meet  the  demands  of  the  existing  emergency  in  education/^ 

In  February  1918  the  National  Education  Association  began 
to  work  for  a  new  program  of  education.  Two  committees  were 
appointed,  one  by  the  president  of  the  National  Educati(5n  Asso- 
ciation and  one  by  the  Department  of  Superintendence.  These  two 
committees  were  merged,  and  became  the  Joint  Commission  of  the 
N.EA.  with  George  D.  Strayer  as  Chairman.  The  first  task  of 
the  commission  was  to  initiate  a  study  of  the  main  defects  of 
American  education  in  the  light  of  the  revelations  of  the  war. 
When  the  Joint  Commission  met  in  Washington  in  March  1918, 
the  Committee  of  the  Emergency  Council  submitted  to  the  Com- 
mittee on  Resolutions  of  the  Department  of  Superintendence  a 
resolution  supporting  the  plan  for  a  Secretary  of  Education,  but 
after  consultation  with  Commissioner  Claxton,  the  Committee  on 
Resolutions  decided  not  to  submit  to  the  convention  the  resolution 
calling  for  the  department  of  education."^^  The  committees  of  the 
Council  and  of  the  N.E.A.  went  on  record  in  favor  of  a  Secre- 
tary of  Education  in  preference  to  a  Board  of  Education,  but 
when  it  was  found  that  certain  Senators  would  not  favor  a  depart- 
ment unless  it  would  be  empowered  to  disburse  large  sums,  it  be- 
came evident  that  a  measure  calling  for  a  department  could  not 
secure  the  unanimous  support  of  higher  education  if  it  were  to 
carry  federal  appropriations.^*  To  obviate  an  impasse,  the  Joint 
Commission  of  the  N-E.A.,  which  refused  to  yield  on  the  matter 
of  the  appropriation,  and  the  American  Council  on  Education, 
which  opposed  the  so-called  50-50  principle  of  federal  subsidy, 
were  called  upon  to  submit  bills  which  would  embody  their  re- 
spective views  and  from  which  Senator  Smith  might  draft  a  com- 
promise measure  that  might  succeed  in  passing  the  Senate.  The 
suggested  compromise  measure  failed  to  materialize  and  the  meas- 
ure that  Senator  Smith  decided  to  present  was  substantially  the 
N.E.A.  bill.  The  American  Council  found  that  it  could  not  active- 
ly support  the  resolution  as  a  whole,  the  opinion  being  that  in  the 
event  of  the  creation  of  an  educational  department,  "its  higher  in- 
tellectual functions  must  not  be  submerged  by  unduly  magnified 
functions  of  the  paymaster  type."^^ 

The  N.EA.  bill  was  prepared  during  the  spring  and  summer 
of  1918,  and  was  introduced  into  the  Sixty-fifth  Congress  by  Sen- 
ator Hoke  Smith  in  October,  1918,  and  by  Representative  Horace 
M.  Towner  on  January  30,  1919.  Between  March  1919  and  May 
1919,  the  bill  was  revised  and  was  reintroduced  into  the  Sixty- 


'2  Arguments  Submitted,  etc..  Pamphlet,  American  Council  on   Education,  p.  2. 

^'Educational   Record,    Vol.    I,    No.    3,    p.    92. 

^*Ibid.,  p.  92. 

"T/ie  Educational  Record,  Vol.  1,  No.   3,  pp.  94-95. 


38  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

sixth  Congress  in  May  1919,  the  Educational  Committee  of  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor  cooperating  in  the  revision."^®  To 
meet  certain  objections  against  the  May  1919  version  of  the  bill,  it 
was  further  amended,  and,  on  January  17,  1921,  the  revised  form 
was  reported  back  to  the  House  with  the  recommendation  that  the 
bill  as  amended  be  passedJ^ 

Failing  to  come  to  a  vote  in  the  66th  Congress,  the  measure 
was  again  introduced  both  in  the  House  and  Senate  in  April,  1921, 
upon  the  opening  of  the  67th  Congress.  Since  Senator  Smith  did 
not  resume  his  seat  this  session,  his  bill  was  sponsored  by  Senator 
Sterling.  Once  again  the  bill  was  carefully  revised  in  an  effort  to 
allay  the  criticism  that  had  arisen  in  regard  to  the  last  Smith- 
Towner  version. 

Provisions  of  the  Bill 
The  purpose  of  the  Sterling-Towner  Bill  as  stated  in  the 
preamble  is  "to  create  a  Department  of  Education,  to  authorize  ap- 
propriations for  the  conduct  of  said  department,  to  authorize  the 
appropriation  of  money  to  encourage  the  States  in  the  promotion 
and  support  of  education,  and  for  other  purposes."  The  principal 
provisions  of  the  bill  are  as  follows : 

1.  A  Department  of  Education  is  created  with  a  Secretary 
in  the  President's  Cabinet  and  an  Assistant  Secretary.  (Sec.  1,  2). 

2.  The  Bureau  of  Education  is  transferred  to  the  Depart- 
ment of  Education  and  the  Congress  is  authorized  to  tranfer  to  it 
such  other  offices,  Bureaus  and  branches  of  the  Government  as  in 
its  judgment  should  be  administered  by  the  Department  of  Educa- 
tion. (Sec.  3). 

3.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Department  of  Education  to 
conduct  studies  and  investigations  in  the  field  of  education  and 
report  thereon.  Research  shall  be  undertaken  in  (a)  illiteracy ; 
(b)  immigrant  education;  (c)  public  school  education,  and  espe- 
cially rural  education;  (d)  physical  education,  including  health 
education,  recreation,  and  sanitation ;  (e)  preparation  and  supply 
of  competent  teachers  for  the  public  schools;  (f)  higher  educa- 
tion ;  and  in  such  other  fields  as,  in  the  judgment  of  the  Secretary 
of  Education  require  attention  and  study.  The  Secretary  of  Edu- 
cation is  further  empowered  to  make  appointments,  or  recom- 
mendations of  appointments,  of  educational  attaches  to  foreign 
embassies.  (Sec.  5). 

4.  $500,000,  or  so  much  thereof  as  may  be  necessary,  is 
appropriated  annually  for  the  purpose  of  paying  salaries,  conduct- 


^«  Keith  and  Bagley,  The  Nation  and  Schools,   New  York,  1920,  p.   142. 
""House    of    Representatives,    Report    No.    1201,    66th    Congress,    Sd    Session,    Janu- 
ary 17,  1921. 


An  Excmiination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  39 

ing  investigations,  and  paying  expenses  incidental  to  administra- 
tion. (Sec.  6). 

5.  The  following  sums  or  as  much  thereof  as  may  be  neces- 
sary are  appropriated  for  co-operation  with  the  States: 

(a)  $7,500,000  is  authorized  to  be  appropriated  for  the 
instruction  of  illiterates  fourteen  years  of  age  and 
over. 

(b)  $7,500,000  for  the  Americanization  of  immigrants. 

(c)  $50,000,000  for  the  partial  payment  of  teachers' 
salaries,  for  providing  better  instruction  and  ex- 
tending school  terms,  especially  in  rural  localities. 
To  avail  itself  of  this  provision,  the  State  will 
maintain  the  following  requirements  as  nearly  as 
its  constitutional  provisions  will  permit: 

(1)  a  legal  school  term  of  at  least  twenty-four 
weeks  in  each  year; 

(2)  a   compulsory  school  attendance  law; 

(3)  a  law  requiring  that  the  English  language  be 
the  basic  language  of  instruction  in  the  com- 
mon-school branches  in  all  schools,  public  and 
private. 

(d)  $20,000  for  the  promotion  of  physical  education. 

(e)  $15,000,000  for  the  preparation  of  teachers  for 
public-school  service,  particularly  in  the  rural 
(Sees.  7-11). 

6.  To  secure  the  benefits  of  any  one  or  more  of  the  re- 
spective apportionments  authorized  in  sections  7-11  inclusive  of 
this  Act,  a  State  shall  by  legislative  enactment  accept  the  provi- 
sions of  the  Act,  and  designate  the  State's  chief  educational  au- 
thority to  represent  said  State  in  the  administration  of  the  Act. 
Moreover,  the  State  must  appropriate  for  the  purposes  of  the 
Act  a  sum  of  money  at  least  equally  as  large  as  the  federal  sub- 
vention in  favor  of  said  State.  (Sec.  12). 

7.  The  chief  educational  authority  of  each  State  must  report 
annually  to  the  Secretary  of  Education  showing  the  work  done 
in  said  State  in  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  the  Act.  This  Act, 
however,  shall  not  be  construed  to  imply  Federal  control  of  educa- 
tion within  the  States,  nor  to  impair  the  freedom  of  the  States  in 
the  conduct  and  management  of  their  respective  school  systems- 
(Sec.  13). 

8.  A  National  Council  on  Education  is  created  to  consult 
and  advise  with  the  Secretary  of  Education  on  subjects  relating 
to  the  promotion  of  education  in  the  United  States.  (Sec.  17). 


40  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

9.  The  Secretary  of  Education  shall  report  annually  to  Con- 
gress giving  an  account  of  all  moneys  disbursed  and  received  by 
the  Department  of  Education,  and  describing  the  work  done  by 
the  Department.  He  shall  make  such  recommendations  to  Con- 
gress as  will,  in  his  judgment,  improve  public  education  in  the 
United  States.  He  shall  also  conduct  such  special  investigations 
and  reports  as  may  be  required  of  him  by  the  President  or  by  Con- 
gress. (Sec.  18). 

10.  All  Acts  or  parts  of  Acts  in  conflict  with  this  Act  are 
repealed.  (Sec.  19). 

Revisions  Arising  From  Adverse  Criticism 

As  already  mentioned,  the  Sterling-Towner  (Smith-Towner) 
Bill  has  assumed  many  forms-  Aware  of  the  amount  of  criticism 
directed  against  the  bill,  its  authors  have  rewritten  the  measure  on 
several  occasions,  and  have  modified  or  clarified  the  provisions 
which  were  so  vigorously  opposed. 

The  results  of  the  opposition  may  be  summarized  as  follows : 

1.  In  an  effort  to  disarm  the  many  critics  of  the  bill  who 
have  been  insisting  that  its  operation  involves  Federal  control  of 
the  educational  activities  of  the  States,  the  version  of  April,  1921, 
states  in  clear  language  that  "all  the  educational  facilities  en- 
couraged by  the  provisions  of  this  Act  and  accepted  by  a  State 
shall  be  organized,  supervised,  and  administered  exclusively  by 
the  legally  constituted  State  and  local  educational  authorities  of 
said  State,  and  the  Secretary  of  Education  shall  exercise  no  au- 
thority in  relation  thereto ;  and  this  Act  shall  not  be  construed  to 
imply  Federal  control  of  education  within  the  States,  nor  to  impair 
the  freedom  of  the  States  in  the  conduct  and  management  of  their 
respective  school  systems."  (Sec.  13). 

2.  Under  the  early  forms  of  the  bill,  the  President  was  em- 
powered to  transfer  to  the  Department  of  Education  such  offices, 
boards,  bureaus,  or  branches  of  the  Government,  the  functions  of 
which  should  in  his  judgment  be  controlled  or  exercised  by  the 
Department.  It  w^as  objected  that  this  was  not  properly  a  matter 
for  presidential  decision.*^^  The  amended  bill  reposes  this  power 
in  Congress-  The  wisdom  of  the  change  is  evident,  since  at  pres- 
ent a  joint  committee  of  the  Senate  and  House  is  at  work  upon 
a  plan  to  reorganize  and  consolidate  the  various  administrative 
branches  of  the  Government.  For  this  reason,  the  Congress 
should  be  in  a  position  to  follow  out  the  recommendations  of  the 
committee  on  reorganization. 

3.  The  earlier  forms  of  the  bill  carried  a  definite  appropria- 

"  Capen,   Samuel  P.,   The  Educational  Review,  Nov.,   1920,   "Arguments  against  the 
Smith-Towner  Bill." 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  41 

tion  of  $100,000,000  for  co-operation  with  the  States.  Of  this 
total  definite  apportionments  were  made  for  the  special  purposes 
of  the  Act.  A  set  sum  of  $7,500,000,  for  example,  was  author- 
ized for  the  removal  of  illiteracy ;  a  corresponding  amount  was 
authorized  for  Americanization,  and  so  on.  Capen  among  others 
insisted  that  the  annual  appropriation  of  $100,000,000  was  a  thor- 
oughly arbitrary  sum;  "no  reliable  data  are  at  hand  to  indicate 
that  just  this  amount  is  needed  to  accomplish  the  purposes  speci- 
fied in  the  bill.  Its  very  roundness  indicates  that  it  is  a  guess .... 
Assuming  that  the  federal  government  should  grant  aid  in  large 
amounts  for  education  in  the  States,  the  actual  need  of  each  phase 
of  education  to  be  subsidized  should  be  determined  in  advance 
on  the  basis  of  careful  study."^®  In  an  effort  to  meet  this  and 
kindred  objections,  the  latest  revision  modifies  the  appropriation 
clauses  by  adding  to  each  of  the  sums  authorized  in  the  bill,  the 
words,  "or  so  much  thereof  as  may  be  necessary."  In  this  way, 
it  is  made  plain  that  the  figures  given  in  the  bill  represent  merely 
the  upper  limit  of  the  amount  that  may  be  expended  under  the 
Act;  in  other  words,  the  revision  emphasizes  the  possibility  that 
the  entire  appropriation  may  not  be  required  to  carry  out  the 
purposes  of  the  Act.  Obviously,  this  change  is  of  little  practical 
importance. 

4.  Certain  opponents  of  the  earlier  versions  maintained  that 
as  far  as  some  of  the  States  were  concerned,  several  of  the  pro- 
visions of  the  measure  would  prove  superfluous.  The  present  bill 
makes  it  clear  that  a  given  State  need  not  apply  for  aid  under  all 
of  the  respective  apportionments  authorized  in  the  bill.  It  may 
therefore  defer  the  acceptance  of  any  one  or  more  of  the  appor- 
tionments. 

5.  An  entirely  new  feature  of  the  latest  revision  is  Section 
17,  which  provides  for  the  creation  of  a  ''National  Council  on 
Education  on  subjects  relating  to  the  promotion  and  development 
of  education  in  the  United  States."  This  section  further  states: 
"The  Secretary  of  Education  shall  be  chairman  of  said  council, 
which  shall  be  constituted  as  follows:  (a)  The  chief  educational 
authority  of  each  State  designated  to  represent  said  State  in  the 
administration  of  this  Act;  (b)  not  to  exceed  twenty-five  edu- 
cators representing  the  different  interests  in  education,  to  be  ap- 
pointed annually  by  the  Secretary  of  Education ;  (c)  not  to  ex- 
ceed twenty-five  persons,  not  educators,  interested  in  the  results 
of  education  from  the  standpoint  of  the  public,  to  be  appointed  an- 
nually by  the  Secretary  of  Education." 

Doubtless  there  were  many  reasons  which  prompted  the 
sponsors  of  the  bill  to  include  this  provision  in  the  latest  revision. 

"  Ibid. 


42  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

Fearing  one  man  rule  in  the  Department  of  Education,  many  edu- 
cators maintained  that  the  policies  of  the  proposed  Department 
should  be  decided  by  an  ex-officio  board,  or  by  a  national  commis- 
sion, composed  of  men  from  various  parts  of  the  country.  How 
far  this  modification  of  the  bill  tends  to  conciliate  opposition  may 
be  open  to  doubt ;  but  it  will  most  probably  be  admitted  that  this 
new  provision  adds  a  decided  element  of  strength  to  the  bill  as  a 
whole. 

From  the  above  paragraphs,  it  can  be  seen  that  the  opposition 
to  the  measure  has  resulted  in  a  number  of  changes  and  clarifica- 
tions in  its  provisions.  It  is  quite  probable  that  continued  exam- 
ination of  the  bill  will  result  in  further  modifications.  In  the 
pages  that  follow,  reference  will  be  to  the  Sterling-Towner  Bill 
as  introduced  in  the  House  and  Senate,  April,  1921. 

Arguments  in  Support  of  the  Bill 

1.  The  Sterling-Towner  Bill  dignifies  education  by  creating  a 
Department  of  Education  with  a  Secretary  of  Education  in  the 
President's  Cabinet.  Education  is  an  essential  corollary  of  democ- 
racy ;  it  is  therefore  of  the  most  utmost  importance  that  it  be  rep- 
resented in  the  councils  of  the  nation.  The  proposed  Department 
would  unify  and  co-ordinate  the  various  educational  enterprises  of 
the  Federal  Government,  and  afford  national  leadership  in  the 
movement  for  better  schools.  In  addition,  the  Department  would 
perform  an  important  function  in  promoting  research  and  in  in- 
vestigating the  educational  needs  of  the  nation.  In  the  event  of 
its  creation,  it  would  put  education  on  the  same  plane  with  com- 
merce and  agriculture  in  establishing  the  general  policies  of  the 
nation.  According  to  Bagley,  it  will  be  needed  "to  represent  the 
people  and  the  Government  of  the  United  States  in  the  solution  of 
international  educational  problems,"^°  and  to  quote  Spaulding, 
the  development  of  a  plan  of  education  adequate  to  national  needs 
"demands  the  establishment  of  a  Department  of  Education  in  the 

national  government In    two-score    governments,     all 

over  the  world,  there  is  found  a  Department,  or  Ministry,  of  Edu- 
cation, or  Public  Instruction.  America  is  distinguished  as  the 
one  important  nation  of  the  world  that  fails  to  recognize  educa- 
tion as  one  of  the  great  national  fundamental  interests  and  re- 
sponsibilities."^^ In  no  other  way,  it  is  held,  could  the  influence 
and  prestige  of  education  be  so  notably  enhanced. 

The  advocates  of  the  Department  insist  that  in  the  work  of 
co-ordinating  and  integrating  the  educational  forces  of  the  Nation, 
leadership  and  not  law  must  be  the  potent  .force ;  with  this  as  a 

*"  Bagley,  W.   C,  Discussion,  Department  of  Superintendence,  N,  E.  A.,  Feb.,  1920. 
«i  Spaulding,   F.   E.,   The  Atlantic  Monthly,  April,   1920. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  43 

guiding  principle,  a  method  of  solving  the  Nation's  educational 
problems  would  come  most  readily,  "and  yet  not  so  readily  that  the 
Secretary  of  Education  would  become  in  any  sense  an  educational 
dictator."^^  The  authority  invested  in  the  Secretary  of  Education 
is  "for  the  single  purpose  of  safeguarding  the  national  interest  in 
having  the  subventions  provided  in  the  bill  administered  honestly. 
Anything  less  is  unthinkable :  anything  more  is  unwise-"^^ 

While  there  has  been  considerable  hesitation  in  some  quar- 
ters to  support  a  program  that  would  make  the  nation's  chief  edu- 
cational officer  a  political  appointee,  the  friends  of  the  bill  insist 
that  education  cannot  escape  politics  and  that  "the  sooner  the 
great  questions  of  education  are  placed  squarely  before  the  people, 
the  sooner  the  problems  of  the  school  will  reach  a  satisfactory 
solution;  and  the  only  way  to  place  these  questions  before  the 
people  is  to  make  them  incisive  political  issues.  To  establish  a 
Federal  Department  of  Education  would  undoubtedly  do  more  to 
keep  education  out  of  politics  in  the  wrong  sense  and  in  politics  in 
the  right  sense  than  could  any  other  measure  that  the  people  can 
take."«* 

2.  The  Sterling-Towner  Bill  perpetuates  on  a  large  scale  the 
principle  of  federal  subsidies  for  educational  purposes.  This  pro- 
vision has  been  severely  criticized  by  opponents  of  the  measure, 
and  in  view  of  the  prejudice  against  federal  appropriations  in  aid 
of  the  States,  the  supporters  of  the  bill  have  labored  diligently  in 
marshalling  their  arguments  in  behalf  of  the  subsidy  principle. 

The  main  reason  for  the  federal  subventions  provided  in  the 
bill  is  to  equalize  educational  opportunities  for  all  the  children  of 
the  nation.  The  bill  "assumes  the  existence  of  a  national  con- 
sciousness ;  that  under  a  common  flag  all  Americans  are  citizens  of 
a  common  country ;  that  the  duties  and  privileges  of  American  citi- 
zenship are  not  affected  by  State  boundaries ;  that  because  of  the 
facilities  for  intercourse  between  the  States,  each  must  inevitably 
share  in  the  strength  or  weakness  of  all ;  that  whatever  tends  to 
elevate  and  strengthen  the  citizenship  of  any  State  promotes  the 
welfare  of  the  entire  country ;  and  that  any  disorder  or  weakness 
in  a  State  or  community  detracts  from  the  general  health  and  se- 
curity of  the  nation."®^  Granting  these  principles,  Strayer  finds  it 
hard  to  understand  "how  one  can  accept  the  fundamental  demo- 
cratic idea  of  equality  of  opportunity  and  at  the  same  time  argue 
against  federal  aid  for  education.  It  is  a  fact  that  one  State  has 
six  times  the  wealth  per  unit  of  population  that  another  State  has. 

"  Keith  and  Bagley,   op.   cit.,  pp.  297-298. 
**lbid.,    p.    304. 

»*  Bagley,  W.  C.  op.  cit.,  p.  10. 
«Magill,    H.    S.,    The   Educational   Review,   Nov.,   1920. 


44  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

If  equality  of  opportunity  is  to  be  provided,  equality  in  the  burden 
of  taxation  which  is  to  be  borne  should  prevail.  It  is  manifestly 
unfair  to  suggest  that  the  type  of  education  which  the  country 
needs  for  all  of  its  children  shall  involve  six  times  as  heavy  a 

burden  for  one  group  of  citizens  as  for  another It  is  a 

sound  doctrine  which  proposes  that  the  wealth  of  the  nation  be  put 
back  of  the  education  of  all  of  its  children."®^ 

It  is  contended  that  equality  of  educational  opportunity  does 
not  exist  to-day  within  a  single  one  of  our  States,^^  and  that  the 
only  method  by  which  the  Federal  Government  can  promote  the 
general  welfare  through  education  is  by  providing  a  group  of  con- 
tinuing subventions.^^  A  serious  drag  on  progress  in  this  direc- 
tion lies  in  the  fact  that  public  opinion  has  not  yet  come  to  appre- 
ciate our  educational  interdependence.  "The  old  notion  of  educa- 
tion OrS  an  indimdual  advantage  rather  than  a  national  asset  and 
necessity  still  persists."^^  The  war,  however,  emphasized  the  rela- 
tion of  the  individual  to  the  Nation,  and  "every  sign  to-day  points 
to  the  ever-increasing  primacy  of  the  national  factor."^^ 

It  is  held  that  the  history  of  federal  aid  to  the  States  offers 
abundant  precedent  for  the  measure.  From  the  earliest  days  of 
the  Republic  to  the  present,  not  a  single  adverse  court  decision 
has  challenged  the  constitutionality  of  federal  aid  for  education.®^ 
Co-operation  on  the  part  of  the  Government  with  the  States  under 
the  Sterling-Towner  Bill  therefore  is  to  be  regarded  simply  as 
one  step  farther  along  already  accepted  lines,  and  is  held  to  be 
the  logical  culmination  of  the  traditional  policy  of  the  Nation. 

3.  The  bill  proposes  to  eliminate  illiteracy,  appropriating  up 
to  $7,500,000  for  that  purpose.  According  to  Sec.  7,  this  sum  is 
to  be  apportioned  to  the  States  "in  the  proportions  which  their 
respective  illiterate  populations  fourteen  years  of  age  and  over, 
not  including  foreign-born  illiterates,  bear  to  such  total  illiterate 
population  of  the  United  States,  not  including  outlying  posses- 
sions, according  to  the  last  preceding  census  of  the  United  States." 

According  to  the  decennial  census  of  1910,  the  total  number 
of  illiterate  persons  of  ten  years  of  age  and  over  included  3,748,- 
031  rural  illiterates,  and  1,768,132  urban  illiterates.  It  has  been 
found  that  for  the  native  whites,  adult  illiteracy  is  six  times  more 
prevalent  in  rural  America  than  in  urban  America ;  from  this  it  is 
concluded  that  the  rural  school  has  failed  to  reach  the  rural  chil- 
dren in  the  measure  that  the  safety  and  progress  of  the  Nation 


8*Strayer,   George  D'.,  Educational  Review,   Nov.,  1920. 

^  Keith  and  Bagley,   op.   cit.,  p.   247. 

^nbid.,  p.  322. 

«»Ibid..   p.   264. 

^Ibid.,    p.    265. 

«^Ibid.,   p.   105. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  45 

demand.®^  It  is  held  that  we  have  succeeded  more  than  three 
times  as  well  with  the  children  of  the  immigrant  than  with  the 
children  of  the  native-born,  and  that  illiteracy  is  predominantly 
a  rural  problem.®^ 

The  problem  is  not  limited  to  absolute  illiteracy.  The  army 
tests,  for  instance,  "revealed  the  fact  that  practically  one  man  out 
of  every  four  (24.9%)  was  unable  to  meet  the  relatively  simple 
test  of  intelligent  reading  and  intelligible  writing."®*  To  remedy 
this  state  of  affairs  it  is  contended  that  nothing  short  of  Federal 
co-operation  will  suffice. 

4.  Closely  allied  to  the  menace  of  illiteracy  is  the  American- 
ization problem.  The  same  reasons  that  inspired  the  Kenyon  and 
other  AJnericanization  Bills  may  be  said  to  exist  in  regard  to  the 
Americanization  clause  of  the  Sterling-Towner  Bill.  Among  edu- 
cators and  statesmen  the  feeling  is  widespread  that  the  Nation 
must  not  rest  content  with  bestowing  American  liberties  to  the 
newcomers  to  our  shores,  but  must  make  them  realize  their  duties 
and  responsibilities  toward  the  land  of  their  adoption-  Accord- 
ing to  the  census  of  1910,  the  foreign-bom  population  of  the 
United  States  numbered  13,515,886.  To  develop  in  this  vast  num- 
ber an  understanding  and  appreciation  of  Arruerican  ideals  is 
regarded  as  essential  to  the  national  welfare  and  as  a  blessing  to 
the  immigrants  themselves.  Without  an  Americanization  pro- 
gram rightly  conceived  and  administered,  it  is  maintained  that  the 
immigrant  cannot  be  assimilated  and  incorporated  into  the  social 
and  political  life  of  the  Nation.  Weight  is  added  to  the  argu- 
ment for  Americanization  when  it  is  realized  that  the  source  of 
recent  immigration  has  been 'the  South  and  East  of  Europe,  re- 
gions in  which  public  education  is  supposedly  negligible,  and  in 
which  there  exist  social  and  political  ideals  so  different  from  our 
own  as  to  complicate  the  problem  of  handling  the  new  immigra- 
tion.«^ 

5.  The  bill  apportions  $50,000,000,  or  as  much  thereof  as 
may  be  required,  for  the  purpose  of  equalizing  educational  oppor- 
tunities. This  sum  is  to  be  used  for  the  partial  payment  of  teach- 
ers' salaries,  for  providing  better  instruction  and  extending  school 
terms,  especially  in  rural  schools,  and  otherwise  providing  equally 
good  educational  opportunities  for  the  children  in  the  several 
States  and  for  the  extension  and  adaptation  of  public  libraries  for 
educational  purposes. 

During  the  school  year  1915-16,  the  average  annual  salary  of 
all  teachers  in  the  United  States  was  $563.08 ;  in  Mississippi  the 

^Ihid.,    pp.    192-194. 
•«76»d.,  p.  195. 
"^Ihid.,  p.   196. 
»'7&id.,    p.    167. 


46  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

lowest  average  annual  salary,  or  $233.64  was  paid,  while  the  high- 
est annual  average  salary,  or  $999.84  was  paid  in  the  District  of 
Columbia.  California  held  second  place  with  $998.45.^^  As  a 
natural  consequence  of  the  inequitable  compensation  of  teachers 
throughout  the  country,  many  of  the  ablest  teachers  have  aban- 
doned the  profession  for  more  lucrative  positions,  and  the  schools 
of  the  country  have  been  obliged  to  employ  untrained  and  inferior 
teachers,  or  to  accept  the  unfortunate  alternative  or  permitting 
vacancies  to  exist.  From  this  it  appears  obvious  that  until  all  the 
schools  both  rural  and  urban  are  taught  by  properly  equipped, 
decently  paid  teaching  staffs,  the  cause  of  education  must  inevi- 
tably suffer  a  distinct  loss. 

There  has  been  correspondingly  a  considerable  difference  in 
the  length  of  school  terms  in  the  various  States.  In  some  com- 
munities the  child  enters  a  veritable  palace  in  which  well-trained 
teachers  conduct  classes  under  the  most  auspicious  conditions, 
while  in  other  sections,  the  child  is  bound  to  attend  school  in  an 
inferior,  poorly  ventilated  or  ill-lighted  structure,  presided  over  by 
a  comparatively  untrained  teacher  during  a  brief  school  year- 
That  such  inequalities  exist  is  traceable  to  the  variations  in  the 
taxable  wealth  in  the  several  States.  According  to  a  recent  study, 
the  wealth  per  capita  varies  from  $669.36  in  Mississippi  to 
$4,135.35  in  Nevada,  and  the  ''taxable  wealth  behind  each  person 
of  school  age  varies  from  $2,026.01  in  Mississippi  to  $27,360.70 
in  Nevada,  wlith  an  average  of  $6,296-55  for  the  entire  country. 
California  can  raise  $30.00  for  the  education  of  each  person  of 
school  age  by  a  millage  one-seventh  as  large  as  is  necessary  in 
Mississippi  to  raise  the  same  amount."^^ 

To  correct  these  manifest  inequalities  of  educational  oppor- 
tunity federal  aid  is  regarded  as  imperative.  If  the  proposed  legis- 
lation is  passed,  it  is  promised  that  all  schools  will  be  made  "equal- 
ly good  in  all  fundamental  matters,  not  by  lowering  the  standards 
of  the  best  schools,  but  by  raising  those  of  the  poor  and  mediocre 
schools."»« 

6.  The  bill  incorporates  also  a  provision  for  physical  educa- 
tion and  instruction  in  the  principles  of  health  and  sanitation,  the 
appropriation  authorized  for  this  purpose  being  $20,000,000.  It  is 
held  that  the  report  of  the  medical  examinations  under  the  Se- 
lective Service  Act,  as  well  as  the  data  based  on  health  inspection 
in  the  schools,  yield  abundant  commentary  on  the  need  of  physical 
and  health  education  in  all  the  schools  of  the  Nation.  This  clause 
is  designed  to  compass  practically  the  same  ends  as  the  Capper 

^Ihid..  p.  291. 
^  Ibid.,  p.  297. 
»»J&trf.,   p.   248. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  47 

Bill,  S.  416.  The  most  conspicuous  difference  between  the  physi- 
cal education  clause  of  this  bill  and  the  Capper  Bill  is  that  the  pro- 
visions of  the  latter  are  more  specific  and  more  carefully  defined 

7.  Another  feature  of  the  bill  is  the  appropriation  authoriz- 
ing $15,000,000  **to  provide  and  extend  facilities  for  the  improve- 
ment of  teachers  already  in  service  and  for  the  more  adequate 
preparation  of  prospective  teachers,  and  to  provide  an  increased 
number  of  trained  and  competent  teachers  by  encouraging, 
through  the  establishment  of  scholarships  and  otherwise,  a  greater 
number  of  talented  young  people  to  make  adequate  preparation 
for  public-school  service." 

The  untrained  teacher  is  generally  looked  upon  as  the  most 
serious  defect  in  public  education.  According  to  a  Bulletin  issued 
in  1916  by  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Education,  "the  United 
States  does  less  to  train  its  teachers  than  any  other  great  civilized 
nation."^^  Of  recent  years  it  has  been  quite  generally  believed 
that  teaching  is  nothing  more  or  less  than  a  transitory  occupation, 
and  accordingly  it  has  not  been  regarded  in  a  manner  befitting  its 
real  dignity  as  a  professional  service.  All  the  statistics  that  are 
available  show  that  the  teacher  shortage  is  serious,  and  worse  still, 
that  the  normal  school  enrollment  has  fallen  off  appreciably.  In 
Connecticut,  for  instance,  there  were  597  students  enrolled  in  the 
normal  schools  of  the  State  in  1900;  whereas  in  1920  there  were 
but  465.^00 

Reporting  the  teacher  shortage  in  the  United  States  on  the 
basis  of  data  obtained  since  September  1,  1920,  the  National  Edu- 
cational Association  estimates  that  the  combined  number  of  vacan- 
cies and  of  teachers  below  standard  throughout  the  country  is 
92,949.^°^  Pennsylvania  is  reported  to  have  727  vacancies  and 
1646  teachers  below  standard ;  Alabama,  979  vacancies  and  1230 
teachers  below  standard.^*^^  From  these  and  similar  reports,  the 
teacher  situation  is  regarded  as  little  short  of  menacing  and  as  in- 
volving the  most  serious  consequences.  The  prompt  enactment  of 
the  Sterling-Towner  Bill,  it  is  believed,  would  aid  greatly  in  the 
solution  of  this  problem. 

8.  The  foregoing  paragraphs  summarize  the  main  argu- 
ments advanced  in  behalf  of  the  Sterling-Towner  Bill.  The  friends 
of  the  measure  insist  that  it  is  the  only  kind  of  a  measure  that  can 
properly  meet  the  existing  emergency  in  education;  upon  it  de- 
pends the  future  of  our  schools  and  the  progress  and  prosperity 


••Judd    and    Parker,    Problems    Involved    in    Standardizing    State    Normal    Schools, 

Bulletin,  1916,  No.  12,  U.  S.  Bur.  Ed.,  p.  137. 
»«>  School  Life,   Vol.  V,  No.  9,  Nov.   1,   1920. 
^'^Ihid.,   Vol.   V,  No.   10,   Nov.    15,  1920. 
»« Ibid. 


48  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

of  our  democratic  institutions.  In  brief,  the  American  school 
cannot  be  content  to  revert  to  its  pre-war  status ;  American  edu- 
cation must  be  overhauled  and  reorganized  if  it  is  to  meet  the 
present  problems  of  democracy. 

The  bill  has  deeply  impressed  the  public  mind,  and  it  is 
gathering  support  not  only  from  the  professional  educator  but 
also  from  a  large  array  of  social  and  civic  organizations.  Never 
before  has  an  educational  measure  had  so  many  enthusiastic  and 
ardent  supporters. 

Arguments  Against  the  Bill 

1.  The  chief  argument  against  the  establishment  of  a  De- 
partment of  Education  is  based  on  the  fear  that  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment would  dominate  education  throughout  the  country.  Presi- 
dent Hadley  of  Yale  views  the  bill  "as  a  long  step  in  the  Prus- 
sianizing of  American  education,"  and  regards  the  introduction  of 
another  cabinet  minister  "as  calculated  to  weaken  rather  than 
strengthen  the  influence  of  the  Cabinet."^^^  He  insists,  moreover, 
that  "the  concentration  of  educational  supervision  in  a  national 
capital  has  always  worked  badly,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  sup- 
pose that  the  United  States  would  prove  an  exception  to  this  gen- 
eral rule.  French  education  when  controlled  from  Paris  has  tended 
to  ossify,  and  only  as  they  have  given  independence  to  different 
parts  of  the  system  has  there  been  progress  made.  All  the  pieces 
of  progress  of  the  last  century  were  done  in  opposition  to  the  na- 
tional incubus  of  a  centralized  bureau."^^*  Likewise  Capen  be- 
lieves that  under  the  bill  the  federal  government  would  gradually 
and  inevitably  come  to  exercise  a  very  large  measure  of  dictation 
and  control,  and  that  federal  control  of  local  educational  activities 
secured  and  perpetuated  by  the  tacit  threat  of  withholding  federal 
grants  would  be  intolerable.^^^ 

While  the  bill  explicitly  states  that  federal  control  of  educa- 
tion in  the  States  is  not  to  prevail  under  the  Act,  Dean  Burris  holds 
that  it  is  there  in  spite  of  all  efforts  to  disguise  it,  and  that  no  such 
national  program  for  education  as  that  contemplated  in  the  bill 
could  be  carried  out  without  a  large  measure  of  federal  control 
both  direct  and  indirect.  If  this  control  is  vested  in  a  Cabinet 
officer,  it  will  be  inevitably  exposed  to  partisan  influences.  Be- 
sides, the  presence  of  a  Secretary  of  Education  in  the  Cabinet  is 
neither  imperative  nor  desirable.  For  the  proposed  Department 
of  Education  a  Federal  Board  of  Education  would  be  preferable. 
Under  such  a  board,  he  maintains,  continuity  in  the  development 


"sr/ie  Educational  Record,   Vol,   1,   No.  3,   p.   105. 

"*  Ibid. 

lOB  The  Educational  Review,  Nov.,  1920,  p.   287. 


An  Excmvination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  49 

of  well  thought  out  policies  would  be  assured,  and  the  dangers 
arising  from  patronage  in  the  appointment  of  assistants  would  be 
prevented.^'^^ 

Federal  control  over  education  is  at  once  unconstitutional 
and  undesirable,  adds  Burris ;  and  in  the  words  of  former  Sena- 
tor Root  it  ''calls  for  the  exercise  of  power  by  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment which  has  not  been  committed  to  that  Government  by 
the  people  of  the  United  States  in  their  Constitution,  but  has  been 
reserved  to  the  several  States.  It  seems  equally  clear  that  no 
such  power  ought  to  be  committed  to  the  Government,  because  it 
would  be  absolutely  inconsistent  with  one  of  the  two  primary  pur- 
poses of  our  system  of  Government,  that  is  to  say,  preservation 
of  the  right  of  local  self-government  in  the  States,  at  the  same 
time  with  the  maintenance  of  National  power ."^°^  According  to 
Professor  Guthrie  of  Columbia,  the  provisions  of  the  bill  would 
"inevitably  involve  an  attempt  at  interference  in  the  local  affairs 
of  the  States,  and  the  policy  of  so-called  federalization  of  educa- 
tion once  established  would  lead  to  an  agitation  and  demand  for  a 
constitutional  amendment  to  vest  adequate  power  of  centralized 
supervision  and  control  in  Congress."^^*  In  this  way,  believes  Bur- 
ris, the  influence  now  working  for  the  beginning  of  a  program  of 
centralization  would  ultimately  destroy  the  "very  substance  of 
Americanism,  which  is  individualism,  self-reliance,  initiative,  and 
responsibility."^"® 

2.  It  is  pointed  out  by  Capen  that  the  bill  fails  to  co-ordinate 
the  present  educational  activities  of  the  Federal  Government;  it 
lays  no  satisfactory  foundations  since  it  "dodges  the  whole  ques- 
tion of  the  co-ordination  and  simplification  of  the  government's 

present  educational  activities It  is  easily  possible  to 

determine  on  the  basis  of  some  defensible  principle  which  existing 
government  offices  belong  in  a  department  with  functions  such 
as  those  of  the  proposed  Department  of  Education.  In  failing  to 
indicate  which  these  are,  the  framers  and  sponsors  of  the  bill  have 
not  faced  the  primary  obligation  of  their  task."^^°  It  is  especially 
noted  that  the  bill  fails  to  include  the  Federal  Board  for  Vocation- 
al Education  under  the  Department  of  Education.  It  is  conceded 
by  most  educators  that  vocational  education  should  be  related  or- 
ganically to  the  rest  of  the  Government's  educational  work;  the 
attempt  to  separate  it  from  general  education  in  States  and  cities 
has  been  disastrous."'    Granting,  however,  that  the  Federal  Board 

**»  Burris,    W.     P.,     Address.    ,A    Federal    Department    of    Education,    Department 

of  Superintendence,  N.  JE.  A.,  February  26,  1920. 
^'"  Quoted  Ibid. 

^"^  Bulletin,   The    Catholic   Educational   Association,   Vol.  XVI,   No.   4,   1920. 
i^O/J.  cit. 

"»  The  Educational  Review,  Nov.,  1920,  pp    286-287. 
»"7btd.,   p.    291.  J 


60  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

is  brought  under  the  Department  as  authorized  by  Section  3  of 
the  Act,  an  anomalous  situation  would  ensue,  because  the  Smith- 
Hughes  Act  admits  supervision  of  education  within  the  States, 
while  the  Sterling-Towner  Bill  denies  such  supervision-^^^ 

In  the  two-fold  character  of  the  measure,  moreover,  there  is 
believed  to  exist  a  misalliance;  it  is  held  that  the  Department  of 
Education  and  the  relief  measure  are  two  different  and  in  some 
respects  conflicting  propositions;  and  "to  promote  the  subsidy- 
feature  the  unification  of  the  government's  educational  activities 
was  sacrificed."^^^ 

3.  While  the  friends  of  the  bill  believe  that  the  measure 
would  not  involve  partisan  politics  in  the  appointment  of  a  Sec- 
retary of  Education,  the  opponents  of  the  bill  are  not  so  optimistic. 

In  the  recent  volume,  "The  Nation  and  the  Schools,"  by 
Keith  and  Bagley,  we  read:  "It  is  said  that  a  President  would 
probably  appoint  as  Secretary  of  Education  a  member  of  his  own 

political  party This  assertion  is  not  true  with  respect 

to  those  who  have  served  as  Commissioners  of  Education 

It  is  reasonable  to  assume  that  the  President  would  honestly  de- 
sire to  find  the  most  capable  man  for  the  Secretaryship  of  Educa- 
tion and  that  he  would  make  every  possible  effort  to  find  such  a 
man  without  making  previous  partisan  service  a  prerequisite  for 
appointment.  With  this  reasonable  assurance,  the  party  affiliation 
of  the  person  appointed  becomes  insignificant."^^* 

The  high  hopes  expressed  in  the  lines  just  quoted  were  given 
a  severe  jolt  by  the  action  of  President  Harding  in  removing  U. 
S.  Commissioner  Claxton.  To  the  friends  of  education  every- 
where, this  action  was  especially  unwelcome-  Speaking  editorial- 
ly in  the  June,  1921,  issue  of  the  "Journal  of  the  National  Educa- 
tion Association,"  Bagley  complained:  "It  is  most  unfortunate 
that  a  change  should  be  made  at  this  time  when  the  need  for  rec- 
ognized national  leadership  in  education  is  imperative.  It  is  cer- 
tain to  be  construed  as  having  been  determined  by  political  mo- 
tives and  in  total  disregard  of  the  growing  demand  for  the  eleva- 
tion of  the  Nation's  chief  educational  office."  Similarly,  the  "Ed- 
ucational Review"  in  its  issue  of  September,  1921,  commented 
that  Commissioner  Claxton's  successor  "would  probably  never 
have  been  selected  by  a  body  of  experts  or  of  impartial  lay  citi- 
zens, and  the  removal  of  Dr.  Claxton  seems  to  have  been  some- 
what impelled  by  political  motives,  which  should  everywhere  be 
eliminated  from  education." 


"»7&trf.,  p.  292. 
"«J6td.,  p.  291. 
"*p.  306. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  51 

This  incident  has  convinced  many  of  the  opponents  of  the 
Sterling-Towner  Bill  that  unless  the  measure  is  defeated,  we 
shall  witness  the  inauguration  at  Washington  of  a  vast  politico- 
educational  machine,  and  that  instead  of  attaining  higher  dignity 
in  the  councils  of  the  nation,  education  may  inherit  the  taint  of 
sordid  partisan  politics. 

4.  The  principal  of  federal  subsidy  as  provided  in  the  bill 
likewise  meets  with  strong  disapproval.  Capen  regards  it  as  an 
accidental  discovery  rather  than  the  result  of  careful  investiga- 
tion.^^^  The  principle  of  federal  subsidy  is  still  on  trial  and  its 
universal  validity  is  by  no  means  proved ;  again,  it  appears  "not 
to  differentiate  between  Federal  stimulation  of  new  educational 
movements  and  Federal  support  of  the  general  educational  enter- 
prise of  the  States."^^^  Basing  his  observations  upon  the  opera- 
tion of  previous  laws  involving  the  principle  of  federal  subven- 
tions, Mann  contends  that  the  distribution  of  $100,000,000  on  the 
fifty-fifty  principle  would  be  a  fatal  blunder  for  educational 
progress  in  the  country.^^^  It  is  also  emphasized  th^t  the  Federal 
education  office  should  exercise  its  leadership  by  means  of  ideas, 
and  that  when  adequately  equipped  to  investigate  educational 
conditions,  to  point  out  defects  and  recommend  improvements,  it 
would  accomplish  everything  that  is  sought  by  large  federal  ap- 
propriations."^ It  is  pointed  out  that  the  result  would  be  more 
wholesome  were  the  State  to  undertake  measures  for  their  own  im- 
provement rather  than  have  improvement  thrust  upon  them ;  the 
dollar  for  dollar  appropriations  are  in  principle  not  far  removed 
from  bribery.^^® 

Judd  observes  that  "the  popular  mind  seems  prone  to  accept 
the  assumption  that  the  Federal  Government  can  with  propriety 
undertake  everything  and  anything.  The  most  insidious  form  of 
this  popular  superstition  is  the  widespread  belief  that  the  Federal 
Government  has  unlimited  financial  resources  upon  which  it  is 
entirely  legitimate  to  draw  for  any  worthy  purpose  which  is  other- 
wise likely  to  become  insolvent."^^°  There  are  no  grounds  for  the 
assumption  that  financial  support  as  provided  in  the  Sterling- 
Towner  Bill  is  the  duty  of  the  Federal  Government  or  that  it  will 
operate  to  raise  educational  standards;  it  is  believed,  moreover, 

"» Ibid.,  p.  289. 

»"  The  Educational  Record,  Vol.   I,  No.  1,  p.  13. 

»"  The  Educational  Review.   Nov.,   1920,.  p.   313. 

^^  Pamphlet,  American  Council  on  Education,  "Arguments  Submitted,  etc."  p.  6. 

"» Ibid. 

^The   Educational   Record,    Vol.    1,    No.    3. 

Note:  In  an  address  delivered  at  the  installation  of  David  Kinley  as  President 
of  the  University  of  Illinois,  Dec.  1,  1921,  President  W.  O.  Thompson  of  Ohio 
State  University  declared  that  if  the  view  prevails  that  education  is  a  national 
issue,  we  may  expect  that  "national  revenues  will  be  increasingly  used  and  that 
the  problems  of  the  relations  between  national  and  state  agencies  will  increase  in 
importance." 


52  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

that  ther£  is  more  danger  than  benefit  in  Federal  appropriations 
without  Federal  supervision.^^^ 

While  many  of  the  arguments  advanced  against  the  Subsidy 
principle  might  be  regarded  as  speculative  merely,  the  lessons  of 
experience  are  available,  and  point  clearly  to  the  weakness  of  fed- 
eral subsidy.  The  Federal  Constitution  of  Switzerland,  for  ex- 
ample, includes  an  amendment  authorizing  the  Government  to 
grant  subventions  to  schools  in  the  cantons.  In  Switzerland,  this 
policy  has  not  been  generally  approved ;  upon  consultation  with 
leading  Swiss  authorities,  Bryce  found  that  it  was  regarded  as  a 
fault  in  the  Swiss  system.    Says  Bryce: 

"The  plan  of  granting  subventions  from  the  national  treasury 
to  the  cantons  is  alleged  to  be  wasteful,  injurious  to  the  cantons  in 
impairing  self-helpfulness,  and  liable  to  be  perverted  for  political 
purposes.  The  dominant  party  can,  it  is  said,  strengthen  itself  by 
these  gifts,  and  bring  a  small  canton  too  much  under  Federal  in- 
fluence. Against  this  it  is  argued  that  the  power  of  withholding 
a  subvention  is  an  engine  for  securing  the  enforcement  of  Federal 
law  by  a  canton  disposed  to  be  be  insubordinate.  No  great  mis- 
chief has  resulted  so  far,  but  the  practice  has  its  risks.  Local  sub- 
sidies have  been  lavishly  bestowed,  and  misused  for  political  ends, 
in  the  United  States  and  in  Canada."^^^ 

Again,  in  the  experience  of  our  own  country,  the  subsidy 
principle  has  shown  its  weakness.  We  have  at  present  laws  au- 
thorizing federal  co-operation  with  the  States  in  the  building  of 
roads.  To  guard  against  abuses  arising  from  this  poHcy,  Presi- 
dent Harding  in  his  message  of  April  12,  1921,  insisted  that  "large 

federal  outlay  demands  a  federal  program  of  expenditure 

The  laws  governing  federal  aid  should  be  amended  and  strength- 
ened. The  federal  agency  of  administration  should  be  elevated 
to  the  importance  and  vested  with  the  authority  comparable 
to  the  work  before  it.  And  Congress  ought  to  prescribe 
conditions  to  federal  appropriations  which  will  necessitate  a  con- 
sistent program  of  uniformity  which  will  justify  the  federal  out- 
lay." 

Federal  aid  for  road-building  operations  is  undoubtedly  ad- 
visable and  in  accord  with  the  Constitution ;  and  to  insure  that  the 
Federal  apportionments  are  wisely  expended,  a  policy  of  Federal 
control  is  necessary.  The  extension  of  such  control  over  educa- 
tion, however,  would  be  highly  detrimental  to  the  best  interests  of 
the  country,  and  would  be  clearly  unconstitutional. 


1"  Jhid. 

"»  Bryce,  James,  Modern  Democracies,  New  York,  1921,  Vol  I,  p.   367. 


An  Excmvination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  53 

Experience  to  date,  therefore,  both  at  home  and  abroad,  can 
scarcely  be  said  to  favor  further  extension  of  the  subsidy  prin- 
ciple in  education. 

Finally,  objection  to  the  $100,000,000  appropriation  is  made 
on  economic  grounds-  Blakely  holds  that  common  honesty  justi- 
fies opposition  to  it  on  the  ground  of  its  excessive  cost  at  a  time 
when  the  country  is  suffering  from'  serious  financial  burdens  re- 
sulting from  the  war.^^^  Former  President  Hadley  of  Yale  objects 
on  kindred  grounds,  believing  that  the  present  is  a  singularly  in- 
opportune time  for  increased  national  expense  at  Washington, 
and  that  the  adverse  effect  of  the  bill  economically  would  greatly 
outweigh  any  possible  good  that  might  be  derived.^^*  It  has  been 
urged  also  that  the  determination  of  the  purpose  for  which  the 
appropriation  should  be  spent  is  too  far  removed  from  the  people 
who  are  taxed  for  the  expenditure.^^^ 

5,  Another  argument  which  has  been  advanced  by  the  oppo- 
nents of  the  Sterling-Towner  Bill  is  that  it  is  a  direct  attack  upon 
the  principle  of  local  self-government;  it  imperils  State  sover- 
eignty and  may  give  rise  to  paternalism  and  bureaucracy.  It  is 
stated  that  "bureaucratic  control  is  the  almost  inevitable  conse- 
quence of  large  Federal  subsidies  devoted  to  any  kind  of  under- 
taking," and  that  "however  carefully  the  appropriating  act  may 
be  drawn  to  preserve  local  autonomy  and  prevent  undue  Federal 
influence  there  is  finally  in  the  hands  of  the  Federal  office  admin- 
istering the  subsidies  great  coercive  power."^^®  Addressing  the 
United  States  Senate  May  32,  1920,  Senator  King  declared  that 
there  is  ''a  propaganda  nation  wide,  to  further  weaken  the  States 
by  transferring  to  the  Federal  Government  the  duty  and  responsi- 
bility resting  upon  the  States  of  educating  all  within  their  borders. 
It  is  unquestionably  the  attribute  of  a  sovereign  State  to  provide 
the  educational  system  for  its  inhabitants.  It  is  an  invasion  of 
the  rights  of  the  States  to  have  some  other  Government  super- 
impose its  educational  system  upon  the  people  therein  or  control 
in  any  manner  the  action  of  such  State  in  relation  to  the  sub- 
ject."^^^  Likewise,  Senator  Thomas  in  addressing  the  Senate  said 
that  he  was  "profoundly  convinced  that  one  of  the  things  that  the 
States  reserved  to  themselves  and  which  is  essential  to  their  in- 
tegrity and  to  the  integrity  of  the  cause  of  local  self-government  is 
their  continued  retention  of  jurisdiction  over  the  education  of  the 
people  within  their  borders."^28    Hence  it  is  argued  that  accord- 


"« Blakely,   P.   L.,    Pamphlet,    The  Case  Against   the   Smith-Towner  Bill.   New   York, 

1920. 
»»«  The  Educational  Record,  Vol.  I,  No.  3. 

^^  Pamphlet,   American  Council   on  Education,    "Arguments   Submitted,   etc."   p    6. 
^^Ihid.,   p.    5. 

»"  Congressional  Record,  May  22,  1920 
^Ibid.,  July  28,  1919. 


54  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

ingly  as  the  tendency  to  give  up  home  rule  in  education  is  realized 
in  the  various  communities  and  States,  local  interest  in  education 
will  correspondingly  wane. 

Impressed  therefore  with  the  possible  effect  of  the  bill  upon 
local  control,  educational  authorities  within  many  of  the  States 
have  been  studying  the  measure  in  its  bearing  upon  their  respec- 
tive States.  In  a  report  to  Governor  Alfred  E.  Smith  of  New 
York  State,  July  19,  1919,  submitted  by  Dr.  Augustus  S.  Down- 
ing, the  assistant  commissioner  of  education,  after  conference 
with  President  John  H.  Finley  of  the  University  of  the  State  of 
New  York,  it  is  concluded  among  other  things  (1)  that  the  bill 
would  add  a  serious  burden  of  taxation  to  the  inhabitants  of  the 
State  without  just  reason;  (2)  that  the  State  of  New  York  has 
taken  the  lead  in  the  fields  encouraged  by  the  bill,  and  that  so  far 
as  the  State  of  New  York  is  concerned,  its  provisions  are  not 
needed;  (3)  that  judging  from  the  experience  of  the  State  of 
New  York  which  expends  approximately  $80,000,000  annually  for 
the  support  of  public  education  (which  sum  represents  an  increase 
of  33  1-3%  within  recent  years)  that  the  $100,000,000  for  the  en- 
tire country  provided  in  the  bill  would  prove  only  a  pittance  of 
the  amount  that  would  be  actually  required  and  demanded  by  the 
States. that  would  take  advantage  of  the  paternalism  thus  offered 
them ;  (4)  that  the  introduction  of  the  bill  at  this  time  is  inoppor- 
tune and  its  passage  is  clearly  not  desirable. 

In  a  Memorandum  subjoined  to  Dr.  Downing's  report,  the 
following  facts  are  pointed  out: 

"In  1918  New  York  paid  37%  of  the  Income  Tax  of  the 
Country.  In  1917  New  York  paid  25%  of  the  Expenditures  of 
Government.  Upon  the  later  basis  New  York  Citizens  would  pay 
for  centralized  education  at  least  $25,000,000.  Under  the  most 
liberal  calculation.  New  York  would  receive  under  the  proposed 
legislation  less  than  $10,000,000/' 

According  to  the  Memorandum,  the  total  educational  appro- 
priation of  the  State  of  New  York  for  1919  is  $17,430,000  and 
under  the  proposed  bill,  'Hhe  additional  moneys  to  New  York 
would  he  surplusage,  at  the  very  disproportionate  share  in  the  ex- 
pense of  obtaining  it."  It  further  states  that  under  the  terms  of 
the  measure  South  Carolina  would  pay  $228,000  and  benefit  to 
the  extent  of  $1,755,000;  Mississippi  would  pay  $143,000  and 
benefit  to  the  extent  of  $2,115,000.  The  following  twelve  States, 
Alabama,  Arkansas,  Florida,  Georgia,  Louisiana,  Mississippi, 
New  Mexico,  North  Carolina,  South  Carolina,  Tennessee,  Texas, 
Virginia  would  collectively  pay  $7,237,000  and  benefit  to  the  ex- 
tent of  $25,424,000. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement             55  \ 

It  is  maintained,  therefore,  that  there  is  no  demand  for  fed-  \ 

eral  legislation  from  the  States  that  have  been  progressive.    The  1 

demand  originates  from  the  States  that  have  failed  in  compulsory  \ 

eduation,  or  that  seek  to  obtain  "pork"  at  the  expense  of  the  j 

richer  States.    The  Memorandum  concludes  that  "the  local  com-  < 

munities  of  New  York  will  in  the  end  pay  the  bill  and  the  work  I 

will  not  be  done  as  well  as  if  done  by  those  concerned."  ' 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  RELATION  OF  THE  FEDERALIZATION  MOVE- 
MENT   TO    DEMOCRACY 

From  the  analysis  of  pending  federal  legislation  given  in  the 
two  preceding  chapters,  it  must  appear  evident  that  the  present 
drift  in  American  life  constitutes  a  significant  departure  from 
the  traditional  policies  of  the  nation,  and  reflects  a  strong  tendency 
to  obscure  the  boundaries  of  the  States  and  to  assert  more  and 
more  the  primacy  of  the  nation. 

The  success  of  the  American  arms  in  battle  wlas  due  in  large 
measure  to  the  rapid  mobilization  of  the  material  and  spiritual  re- 
sources of  the  nation.  To  achieve  victory,  the  American  people 
willingly  submitted  to  a  highly  centralized  system  of  control  and 
gladly  surrendered  their  wonted  liberties  which  hitherto  they  had 
religiously  guarded  against  the  aggression  of  autocratic  power. 
With  the  cessation  of  hostilities,  it  was  to  be  expected  that  Amer- 
ica would  strive  to  revert  to  a  pre-war  status,  and  gradually  re- 
store the  liberties  appropriate  to  a  democratic  commonwealth. 
This,  however,  proved  not  to  be  the  case.  It  appeared  in  fact 
that  we  were  wilfully  prohibiting  their  normal  and  natural  restor- 
ation.^2®  Not  a  few  were  impressed  with  the  achievements  of  cen- 
tralized leadership  and  control,  and  hence  a  considerable  effort 
was  put  forth  to  perpetuate  the  system  which  served  the  common 
cause  so  admirably  in  time  of  stress.  Bureaucratic  control  proved 
advantageous  in  time  of  war,  it  was  alleged;  therefore,  it  is  no 
less  desirable  in  time  of  peace.  This  fallacy  was  not  without  its 
appeal ;  and  its  logical  correlate  was  embodied  in  the  formula  that 
a  democracy  cannot  thrive  without  a  maximum  of  social  control. 
All  too  frequently  it  was  forgotten  that  war  is  an  utterly  abnormal 
situation  and  that  much  of  what  is  appropriate  and  needful  in 
war  times  is  inapplicable,  harmful  and  even  |>ernicious  in  peace 
times."° 

The  current  federalization  tendency  is  the  reflection  of  a  so- 
cial and  political  philosophy  whose  legitimate  fruition  is  socializa- 
tion on  an  ever-increasing  scale-  It  is  maintained  that  "the  most 
outstanding  lesson  of  the  world-war  is  that  the  shibboleth  of  in- 
dividual liberty  which  so  long  held  us  in  thrall  is  no  longer  suffi- 
cient.  Everywhere  in  our  increasingly  complex  and  in- 
terdependent society  the  ideal  of  socialization  is  taking  its  place. 

*"  Addams,  Jane,  Papers  and  Proceedings  American  Sociological  Society,  Vol.  XIV, 
Chicago,  1919,  p.  212. 

*••  Kahn,  Otto  H.,  The  Menace  of  Paternalism,  Address,  Convention  of  the  Amer- 
ican Bankers  Association,  Chicago,  1918,  p.  84. 

56 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  57 

With  reference  to  education  we  are  realizing  that  intelligence 
alone  can  be  trusted  to  maintain  and  improve  our  social  heritage 
and  hence  the  question  of  education  can  no  longer  be  regarded  as 
an  individual  matter  but  must  be  accepted  as  a  social  responsibil- 
ity. The  nation  should  see  to  it  that  every  child  has  not  merely 
the  opportunity  to  get  whatever  educational  training  he  is  able  to 
assimilate  but  that  he  be  compelled  to  take  it.  Compulsory  school 
laws  must  be  made  universal  and  more  effective  than  they  have 
been  in  the  past.  No  State  can  safely  be  permitted  on  the  basis 
of  State  control  to  stand  in  the  way  of  progress  and  national  safe- 
ty by  allowing  its  children  to  grow  up  in  ignorance Our 

next  step  should  be  to  modify  it  (the  doctrine  of  State  rights)  in 
the  field  of  education  by  centralizing  control  in  the  federal  govern- 
ment so  that  we  can  mobilize  our  educational  forces  and  make 
an  efficient  education  a  universal  democratic  birthright. "^^^ 

The  preceding  sentences  convey  the  thoughts  of  Professor 
Walter  R.  Smith  of  the  University  of  Kansas  and  they  may  be 
said  to  embody  succinctly  the  philosophy  of  the  centralization 
movement  as  it  expresses  itself  educationally.  This  movement, 
however,  has  not  gone  unchallenged.  Opposing  it  stands  an  in- 
fluential school  of  thinkers,  who  with  President  Butler  believe  that 
"the  cornerstone  of  American  government  and  of  American  life 

is  the  civil  liberty  of  the  individual  citizen Ours  is  not  a 

government  of  absolute  or  plenary  power  before  whose  exercise 

the  individual  must  bow  his  head  in  humble  acquiescence 

The  most  pressing  question  that  now  confronts  the  American  peo- 
ple, the  question  that  underlies  and  conditions  all  problems  of  re- 
construction and  advance  as  we  pass  from  war  conditions  to  the 
normal  times  of  peace,  is  whether  we  shall  go  forward  by  preserv- 
ing those  American  principles  and  American  traditions  that  have 
already  served  us  so  well,  or  whether  we  shall  abandon  those  prin- 
ciples and  substitute  for  them  a  State  built  not  upon  the  civil 
liberty  of  the  individual,  but  upon  the  plenary  power  of  organized 
government."^^^ 

It  is  pointed  out  by  Cubberley  and  Elliot  that  the  growth  of 
democracy  has  resulted  in  a  remarkable  extension  of  the  func- 
tions of  the  State,^^^  and,  according  to  Chancellor,  there  is  appar- 
ently no  limit  to  what  the  democratic  State  in  our  land  may  yet 
undertake.^^*  From  the  expansion  of  State  function  to  the  in- 
crease of  federal  function  there  appears  a  ready  transition;  and 


*»  Smith,  W.  R.,  Papers  and  Proceedings,  American  Sociological  Society,  Vol.  XIV, 
Chicago,  1919. 

*"  Butler,  N.  M.,  Address.  "Is  America  Worth  Saving?"  delivered  before  Commer- 
cial Qub  of  Cincinnati,  Ohio,  April   19,  1919. 

"•  Cubberley  and  Elliott,  State  and  County  School  Administration,  Vol.  II,  New 
York,  1915,  p.   3. 

»»*  Chancellor,   W.    E.,   Educational   Sociology,   New  York,   1919,  p.  243. 


58  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

advocates  of  socialization  regard  it  as  an  inherently  democratic 
procedure.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are  those,  who,  with  Presi- 
dent Butler,  regard  as  undemocratic  any  movement  that  tends  to 
weaken  the  principle  of  local  control  and  transfer  the  burdens  of 
the  States  to  the  Federal  Government. 

Not  all  of  the  educational  bills  discussed  in  Chapters  III  and 
IV  explicitly  provide  for  a  large  measure  of  federal  control,  yet 
several  of  the  resolutions,  as  we  have  seen,  are  plainly  calculated 
to  achieve  national  leadership,  direction,  and  control.  National 
control  and  federalization  of  education  is  the  unmistakable  ten- 
dency in  the  current  legislation  of  Congress.  To  meet  the  conten- 
tion that  this  procedure  is  the  summation  of  a  desirable  and  far- 
reaching  democratic  movement,  it  is  well  to  study  carefully 
whether  or  not  the  federalization  movement  is  democratic  in  spirit 
and  conducive  to  the  highest  good  of  the  American  people.  As 
has  been  previously  stated,  the  prevailing  test  of  our  institutions  is 
their  measure  of  service  to  democracy ;  and  surely  no  less  a  test 
should  be  applied  to  the  contemplated  legislation  which,  if  enacted 
and  made  a  part  of  the  organic  law  of  the  land,  is  destined  to  ex- 
ert an  important  influence  upon  the  future  of  our  institutions  and 
the  quality  of  our  national  life. 

The  Nature  of  Democracy 

Before  a  critical  judgment  can  be  made  on  the  relation  of  the 
federalization  movement  in  education  to  democracy,  it  should 
prove  helpful  to  pause  for  a  moment  to  consider  the  meaning  of 
democracy.  Unless  some  concept  of  the  nature  of  democracy  is 
accepted  as  a  working  hypothesis,  it  is  obvious  that  any  valuations 
based  on  the  grounds  of  democracy  cannot  escape  being  superficial 
and  elusive.  Even  where  there  exists  substantial  agreement  as 
to  the  nature  of  democracy,  its  legitimate  implications  education- 
ally are  far  from,  being  clear. 

With  regard  to  the  meaning  of  political  democracy,  there  is 
little  ground  for  disagreement.  According  to  Bryce,  "the  word 
Democracy  has  been  used  ever  since  the  time  of  Herodotus  to  de- 
note that  form  of  government  in  which  the  ruling  power  of  a 
State  is  legally  vested,  not  in  any  particular  class  or  classes,  but 
in  the  members  of  a  community  as  a  whole.  This  means,  in  com- 
munities which  act  by  voting,  that  rule  belongs  to  the  majority, 
as  no  other  method  has  been  found  for  determining  peaceably 
and  legally  what  is  deemed  to  be  the  will  of  a  community  which 
is  not  unanimous.  Usage  has  made  this  the  accepted  sense  of 
the  term."^3^ 


Bryce,  James,  Modern  Democracies,   Vol.   I,  p,   20. 


An  Exarmnation  of  the  Federalization  Movement  59 

This  definition  amply  satisfies  the  demands  of  the  political 
scientist,  but  when  it  is  remembered  that  in  the  actual  work  of 
education,  not  merely  civic  but  social  efficiency  is  the  goal,  the 
educator  has  reason  to  insist  that  the  school  is  interested  not  only 
in  training  the  youth  of  the  nation  for  intelligent  participation  in 
the  political  life  of  the  nation,  but  also  in  its  wider  social  activities. 
When  we  speak,  therefore,  of  education  for  democracy,  we  mean 
that  education  which  equips  the  individual  to  realize  and  perform 
his  duties  not  only  as  a  citizen  of  our  country,  but  also  as  a  sharer 
in  the  wider  range  of  moral  and  social  interests  and  attitudes, 
without  which  political  democracy  can  scarcely  hope  to  survive. 

Qearly  enough,  then,  education  designed  to  promote 
democracy  in  its  widest  sense,  will  not  only  foster  civic  efficiency 
in  the  youth  of  the  land,  but  will  tend  to  afford  that  aim  a  wider 
moral  and  social  basis. 

Already  the  peoples  of  progressive  countries  have  achieved  a 
palpable  measure  of  political  democracy.  For  the  most  part,  the 
vision  of  democracy  halts  there ;  and  while  the  tendency  of  labor 
at  present  is  to  repulse  autocratic  industry,  economic  democracy 
represents  rather  an  aspiration  than  an  achievement.  Beyond  the 
realm  of  government,  therefore,  democracy  is  fundamentally  an 
aspiration,  and  in  most  minds  it  sublimates  into  a  highly  ideal  con- 
ception. 

A  very  deep-rooted  fallacy  concerning  democracy  consists  in 
the  belief  that  equality  is  essential  to  democracy.  This  prejudice 
is  widespread  and  finds  ample  expression  in  current  literature. 
Nearly  a  century  ago  De  Tocqueville  found  it  fundamental  in 
our  conception  of  democracy :  his  impression  was  that  Americans 
are  so  enamored  of  equality  that  they  would  rather  be  equal  in 
slavery  than  unequal  in  frcedom.^^®  Mecklin  holds  that  while 
equality  is  preached  as  the  goal  of  democratic  strivings,  and  the 
test  of  institutions  is  seen  in  the  extent  to  which  they  assure  equal- 
ity, in.  reality  it  is  "not  ultimate  even  in  a  democracy.  It  will  always 
remain  more  or  less  a  fiction.  Nature  and  heredity  have  weighted 
the  scales  against  it.  At  best,  equality  is  a  social  program  for  the 
control  and  utilization  of  the  inequalities  that  are  inevitable  and 
even  necessary  to  a  progressive  society.  For  progress  demands 
inequality  as  well  as  equality."^^^ 

The  dictum  that  all  men  are  bom  equal  is  not  true  in  an  or- 
ganic sense ;  applied  to  sentient  beings  equality  is  a  misnomer.^^® 
With  President  Butler,  Smith  agrees  that  "nature  knows  no  such 
thing  as  equality ;"  there  is,  however,  "an  eternal  tendency  toward 
the  equilibration  of  the  forces  of  nature  and  of  life.    In  organized 

i«Mecklin,  John  M.,  An  Introduction  to  Social  Ethics,  New  York,  1920,  p.   4. 

^Ibid.,  p.  4. 

"«Smith,  W.   R.,  An  Introduction  to  Educational  Sociology,   Boston,  1917,  p.  160. 


60  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

society  this  takes  the  form  of  securing  for  each  individual  and 
each  class  comparatively  equal  rights,  privileges  and  opportunities 
to  make  the  most  of  whatever  possibilities  nature  or  circumstances 
have  provided. "^^® 

Education,  therefore,  is  an  unfortunate  example  for  the  ad- 
vocates of  equality  of  opportunity ;  they  would  be  more  consistent 
if  they  demanded  unequal  opportunity,  since  that  would  make  the 
most  rather  than  the  least  of  those  who  are  inferior.^*°  In  addi- 
tion, it  would  afford  the  highest  possible  opportunities  for  the 
nation's  future  leadership.  It  seems  evident  then  that  the  oppor- 
tunities in  the  school  should  be  as  unequal  as  the  persons  and  their 
future  vocations.^^^  President  Hall  regards  the  uniformity  of 
treatment  of  pupils  which  prevails  in  the  schools  as  arising  from 
an  over-developed  idea  of  democracy ;  all  are  born  free  and  equal, 
hence  all  must  be  treated  alike.^*^  To  repeat  the  thought  of  Her- 
bert Spencer,  the  rage  for  uniformity  is  the  outcome  of  a  nature 
which  values  equality  much  more  than  liberty.^*^ 

Another  misconception  associated  with  the  idea  of  democracy 
lies  in  the  belief  that  the  individual  in  the  democratic  state  is  com- 
pletely merged  or  absorbed  in  the  socializing  process.  While 
every  democracy  does  propose  to  integrate  the  group  and  to  de- 
velop homogeneity  of  ideals  and  sentiments  concerning  the  essen- 
tials of  group  life,  democracy  does  not  propose  to  suppress  in- 
dividual differences  or  to  develop  a  stereotyped  individuality.  The 
fate  of  democracy  is  linked  up  with  the  perfection  and  protection 
of  personality.  Hence,  while  it  is  the  concern  of  democracy  to 
increase  cooperative  group  action,  its  aim  is  not  mass  action  as 
such ;  it  is  even  more  important  that  in  the  transformation  or  re- 
making of  the  individual  as  he  enters  the  group  that  he  be  in  a 
measure  disengaged  from  the  mass.  Democracy  accordingly  in- 
volves the  realization  of  personality.  In  a  real  democracy,  person- 
ality is  a  sacred  thing,  and  the  impulse  to  develop  from  within  is 
everywhere  fostered.  From  this  point  of  view,  it  may  be  con- 
cluded that  democracy  is  equality  of  opportunity  for  self-expres- 
sion.^** Hence  it  follows  that  self -direction  is  necessary  in  a 
democracy.  The  freedom  that  democracy  guarantees  can  be  pre- 
served only  through  the  exercise  of  self-restraint  Internal  re- 
straint rather  than  external  coercion  is  relied  upon. 

The  history  of  human  liberty  chronicles  the  struggle  of  the 
individual  against  the  curb  of  group  authority,  and  quite  similarly, 

issj&td.,  p.  160. 

**'Harris,    George,   Inequality   and   Progress,   Boston,    1897,    p.    49. 
^*^Ihid. 

^*»Partridge,  G.   E.,  Genetic  Philosophy  of  Education,  T<!eyf  York,  1912,  p.  221. 
"'Spencer,   Herbert,   Principles   of   Sociology,    New   York,   1897,    II-3,   p.   597. 
***Chapin,  F.  S.,  Papers  and  Proceedings,  American  Sociological  Society,  Vol.  XIV., 
Chicago,  1919,  p.  100. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  61 

the  history  of  democracy  records  the  long  period  which  it  is  tak- 
ing to  substitute  for  irresponsible  and  autocratic  domination  the 
self-reliance  and  self-expression  of  the  individual.  When  the  in- 
dividuals composing  the  group  exercise  their  freedom  with  due  re- 
gard for  the  rights  of  others,  and  when  they  cooperate  effectively 
in  the  pursuit  of  group  ends,  social  order  exists,  and  democracy 
functions  in  a  real  and  vital  manner.  Thus  democracy  may  be 
represented  to  be  a  mode  of  life,  primarily  social  and  spiritual, 
and  not  merely  a  poHtical  formula.  In  other  words,  it  is  "a  maxi- 
mum of  order  with  a  minimum  of  coercion.  It  is  self-restraint, 
high  idealism,  and  kindly  toleration.  It  is  internal  and  spiritual, 
historical  and  actual.     It  is  not  merely  external  and  social."^*** 

To  sum  up  then,  democracy  is  fundamentally  a  mode  of  life- 
It  is  an  attitude  and  quality  of  the  human  spirit  rather  than  a 
form  of  government ;  it  aims  at  the  common  well-being,  and  it  is 
a  faith  which  holds  that  a  common  good  will  may  control  all  so- 
ciety.^*® It  depends  not  on  regulations  or  controls  imposed  from 
above,  but  on  ideals  and  motives  that  furnish  an  inner  propulsion 
for  progress.^*^  Its  intimate  concern  is  the  development  of  per- 
sonality and  character,  and  the  protection  of  human  rights,  no 
less  than  the  spread  of  confidence  and  trust  among  men;  its  per- 
sistent endeavor  is  to  harmonize  personal  liberty  with  stability  of 
government.  It  depends  upon  the  social  will  that  substitutes  co- 
operation for  competitive  struggle;  it  requires  devotion  to  the 
good  of  all  as  the  supreme  and  dominating  purpose  of  human  life, 
and  it  recognizes  always  that  the  happiness,  freedom,  and  well- 
being  of  a  people  come  not  from  regulation,  or  by  legislation,  but 
from  the  hearts  and  minds  of  men.^*®  It  is  best  interpreted  in 
terms  of  opportunity,  fair  play,  equal  rights  and  hatred  of  oppres- 
sion.^*^ It  aspires  finally  to  that  stage  of  social  progress  which 
gives  actual  expression  in  daily  life  to  the  formula  offered  by 
Ross:  "The  maximizing  of  harmony  and  cooperation  and  the 
minimizing  of  hostihty  and  conflict."^^°  Ultimately  then  democ- 
racy involves  the  Christian  concept  of  life:  the  brotherhood  of 
man  based  on  the  Fatherhood  of  God. 

Educational  Demands  of  Democracy 

From  the  preceding  paragraphs  it  may  be  concluded  that 
education  for  democracy  directly  involves  the  development  of 


i«Kerby,   William   J.,   Ibid.,   Vol.    XIII,   Chicago,   1918,   p.   147. 

^•'Cope,   Henry   F.,  Education   for  Democracy,  New  York,  1920,  p.   1. 

^^-ilbid.,  p.   8. 

i«7bid.,   pp.   27-28. 

^"O'Grady,    John,    Address,    Proceedings    Americanization    Conference,    Washington, 

1919,  p.   354. 
"'Ross,   E.   A.,   Papers  and  Proceedings,  American   Sociological   Society,  Vol.   XIV., 

Chicago,  1919,  p.  133. 


62  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

character  and  the  realization  of  personality.  Thus  it  becomes  a 
problem  at  once  moral  and  spiritual,  educational  and  social. 

While  historically  the  church  has  been  the  principal  agency 
in  education  for  spiritual  and  social  ends,  the  rise  of  sectarianism 
and  consequently  of  secularism  in  modern  times  has  made  it  im- 
perative that  the  shool  assume  a  large  share  of  the  burden  of 
training  for  moral  and  social  living.  While  the  churches  of 
America  have  by  no  means  abdicated  their  trust,  statistics  show 
that  their  collective  appeal  is  surprisingly  limited.  Practically 
two-thirds  of  the  American  people  are' not  affiliated  with  any  de- 
nomination, and  among  large  sections  of  our  people  religious  faith 
is  undoubtedly  on  the  decline. 

A  serious  task,  then,  is  transferred  to  the  school,  and  one  in- 
deed for  which  it  is  largely  unprepared.  Since  the  ultimate  pur- 
pose of  education  is  moral  and  the  primary  needs  of  democracy 
are  moral  and  spiritual,  democracy  demands  a  moral  product  from 
its  schools.^^^  The  present  deficiency  of  the  American  school  lies 
in  the  fact  that  it  has  not  succeeded  in  meeting  the  new;  demands 
that  have  been  made  upon  it.  If  therefore  it  is  to  serve  the  in- 
terests of  democracy,  it  becomes  the  supreme  duty  of  the  Ameri- 
can school  to  emphasize  the  primacy  of  moral  and  spiritual  values 
through  the  entire  gamut  of  its  organic  teaching.  The  problem  is 
not  an  easy  one,  but  it  is  extremely  important ;  and  until  the  school 
can  so  readjust  itself  as  to  attack  the  problem  effectively,  its  ser- 
vice to  democracy  must  of  necessity  be  meager.  . 

According  to  Cope,  education  for  democracy  is  "education  for 
social  life  based  on  a  concept  of  supreme  values  in  personality,  of 
society  as  existing  for  spiritual  ends."^^^  The  high  product  of 
democracy  is  the  individual,  and  the  primary  task  of  the  demo- 
cratic school  is  to  develop  the  individual  and  to  aid  and  foster 
his  spiritual  and  social  self-realization. 

On  the  basis  of  the  foregoing  considerations,  it  will  be  possi- 
ble to  formulate  a  group  of  principles  that  should  guide  the  edu- 
cational policies  of  a  democratic  society.    They  are  as  follows : 

1.  Education  should  be  made  universal.  In  a  country 
wherein  all  share  a  voice  in  the  shaping  of  public  policies,  an  irre- 
ducible minimum  of  education  should  be  made  compulsory  for 
all  the  nation's  children.  The  welfare  of  democracy  depends  on 
the  universal  diffusion  of  knowledge  among  its  members ;  without 
an  educated  electorate  democratic  institutions  must  inevitably  fail. 

2.  Mere  literacy  is  an  insufficient  guarantee  of  civic  compe- 
tence. Yet  we  commonly  judge  a  nation's  educational  status  by 
the  standard  of  literacy.    "Thus  we  naturally  slip  into  the  belief 

»»Cope,  Henry  F.,  Op.  cit.,  p.  141. 
^"Ibid.,  p.   43. 


An  Excmdnation  of  the  Federalisation  Movement  63 

that  the  power  to  read  is  a  true  measure  of  fitness,  importing  a 
much  higher  level  of  intelligence  and  knowledge  than  the  illiterate 
possess."^*^^  Obviously,  the  extent  to  which  elementary  education 
equips  one  for  citizenship  in  a  democracy  has  been  greatly  over- 
estimated. \ 

Every  effort,  then,  should  be  made  to  lift  the  level  of 
social  intelligence.  Universal  high  school  education  is  an  ideal 
worth  striving  for.  "If  we  recognize  the  responsibility  of 
the  schools  for  the  development  of  intelligent  members  of  a 
democratic  society,  the  period  of  education  will  have  to  be  ex- 
tended until  at  least  eighteen  years  of  age."^^*  Moreover,  it 
should  be  the  conscious  aim  of  democracy  to  see  that  a  fair 
degree  of  cultural  education  is  given  to  all.  While  the  school 
should  encourage  vocational  efficiency  that  the  nation  may 
compete  successfully  in  the  markets  of  the  world,  premature 
vocationalism  should  be  carefully  avoided.  Otherwise  the 
tendency  will  be  to  sanction  the  social  stratifications  fostered 
by  the  Prussian  school  system.  Again,  to  equip  the  individual 
for  the  proper  enjoyment  of  the  increased  hours  of  leisure  that 
are  now  beginning  to  prevail,  the  individual  should  be  put 
into  possession  not  merely  of  the  rudiments  of  learning  plus  a 
trade  knowledge,  but  also  of  the  riches  of  his  aesthetic  and 
spiritual  inheritance.  In  short,  his  training  should  give  him 
an  increased  capacity  to  appreciate  the  higher  things  of  life 
and  to  share  the  common  heritage  of  joy  and  culture. 

3.  A  democracy  should  see  to  it  that  a  superior  training 
is  given  its  future  leaders.  Without  sane  leadership  to  enact 
laws  and  wisely  administer  public  affairs,  the  reins  of  govern- 
ment fall  into  the  hands  of  the  demagogue  or  corrupt  poli- 
tician, and  social  progress  is  unthinkable.  The  fate  of  soviet 
Russia  is  a  striking  example  of  the  demoralizing  influence  of 
government  without  leadership.  Unless  therefore  the  best 
minds  of  the  nation  are  trained  and  selected  for  leadership, 
either  anarchy,  mob  rule,  or  autocracy  will  surely  prevail. 

"A  democracy,  more  than  any  other  country,  demands  in- 
equality^ in  the  education  given  to  its  members.  Those  vvno 
arfe'^Specially  gifted  by  nature  must,  for  the  public  good,  re- 
ceive such  a  training  as  will  fit  for  leadership,  and  this  train- 
ing is  neither  possible  nor  necessary  for  the  rank  and  file  of 
voters  whose  highest  duty  it  is  to  second  the  efforts  of  the 
leaders  whom  they  conscientiously  select  from  the  ranks  of 
those  who,  by  training  and  virtue,  are  available."^'** 


"•Bryce,  James,  op.  cit..  Vol.  I,  p.  71. 

"*Straycr  and  Engelhardt,  The  Classroom  Teacher,  New  York,  1920,  p.  12. 

"•Shields,  T.   E.,  Phil,  of  Ed.,  p.  262. 


^11 


64  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 


It  is  accordingly  in  keeping  with  the  democratic  spirit 
to  see  that  poverty  should  not  bar  talent  from  the  higher  pro- 
fessions. A  democracy  interested  in  its  own  advancement  can 
no  mofe  afford  to  waste  its  genius  than  to  waste  its  material 
resources.^®®  That  proper  leadership  be  chosen,  the  rank  and 
file  of  voters  should  be  impressed  with  the  importance  of 
their  role  as  hirers  of  experts  for  the  public  service.  Faith  in 
leadership  and  support  of  worthy  leaders  are  vital  to  progress 
in  a  democracy. 

4.  Education  for  democracy  demands  further  that  the 
social  significance  of  education  receive  still  wider  recogni- 
tion. The  school  should  foster  civic  and  social  interests;  the 
content  of  the  curriculum  should  be  so  organized  as  to  give 
due  emphasis  to  social  values;  the  various  subjects  taught 
should  be  related  to  the  problems  of  social  and  community  life. 
The  concept  of  social  responsibility  as  well  as  social  rights 
should  receive  frequent  consideration. 

5.  Education  for  democracy  demands  also  that  a  demo- 
cratic spirit  pervade  the  school  atmosphere.  This  involves  the 
incorporation  of  democratic  methods  and  procedures,  and 
makes  classroom  work  a  distinctly  co-operative  enterprise. 
Training  for  democracy  is  inane  when  conducted  under  class- 
room experiences  of  autocracy.  While  authority  has  its  legiti- 
mate place  in  the  school,  the  feeling  is  widespread  that  in 
many  schools  its  exercise  has  been  excessive,  and  as  a  result 
frequently  detrimental  to  the  development  of  the  child's  ini- 
tiative and  self-reliance. 

6.  In  education  for  democracy  the  type  of  education  of- 
fered should  be  adapted  to  the  nature  and  abilities  of  the  in- 
dividuals to  be  educated.^^^  Since  democracy  is  concerned 
with  the  individual,  his  capacity  and  needs  must  be  kept  con- 
stantly in  mind.  For  a  long  period  in  our  history,  all  of  the 
pupils  entering  the  high  school  were  compelled  to  follow  the 
traditional  courses  preparatory  to  college  work.  Of  recent 
decades,  however,  differentiations  in  the  curriculum  have  been 
arranged  so  that  the^tudent  whose  school  career  ceases  with 
the  high  school  receives  not  only  a  disciplinary  or  cultural 
training  but  in  addition  an  amount  of  practical  or  vocational 
knowledge  that  will  enable  him  to  articulate  successfully 
with  the  outside  world  upon  leaving  school. 

The  recognition  of  mental  variations  is  also  a  duty  of  the 
democratic  school.  As  current  practice  illustrates,  the  dullard, 
defective,  and  precocious  are  treated  indifferently  and  con- 

*"Sniith,  W.  R.,  Papers  and  Proceedings,  American  Sociological  Society,  Vol.  XIV. 

Chicago,  1919,  p.  153. 
^^Ihid.,  p.  154. 


{ 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  65 


tinue  to  be  the  victims  of  a  fictitious  "average"  system  of 
grading.  Progressive  educational  theory,  therefore,  requires 
that  individual  differences  be  recognized  and  that  the  school 
adapt  its  teaching  to  meet  the  special  needs  of  variant  types. 

7.  Finally,  since  democracy  is  primarily  an  experiment 
in  character,^^^  and  demands  the  development  of  moral  and 
social  beings,  education  for  democracy  must  foster  the  devel- 
opment of  desirable  moral  and  social  virtues.  Chief  among 
them  are :  faith  in  one's  fellow  man,  respect  for  law  and  con- 
stituted authority,  self-control  and  self-reliance,  disciplined 
initiative,  a  sense  of  one's  obligations  as  well  as  one's  rights, 
an  intolerance  of  abuses  or  oppression  in  social  life,  and  finally 
a  sense  of  solidarity;  that  is,  a  community  spirit  that  ex- 
presses itself  in  devotion  to  the  common  good,  in  due  regard 
for  the  rights  of  others,  and  in  a  readiness  to  co-operate 
toward  the  realization  of  the  ends  of  group  life.  In  propor- 
tion as  the  school  succeeds  in  developing  these  traits  in  the 
youth  of  the  nation,  democracy  will  flourish  and  g^ow  strong. 
As  Bryce  well  observes,  "Knowledge  is  one  only  among  the 
things  which  go  to  the  making  of  a  good  citizen.  Public  spirit 
and  honesty  are  more  needful."^"® 

Federal  Control  and  Democracy 

Education  for  democracy  is  the  g^eat  task  confronting  the 
American  school.  Democracy,  as  we  have  seen,  is  in  large 
measure  an  educational  problem ;  the  success  of  democratic  in- 
stitutions depends  upon  the  propagation  of  a  democratic  faith 
through  the  school.  Just  as  democracy  must  foster  the  school, 
the  school  must  in  turn  foster  democracy. 

It  is  evident,  however,  that  the  school  cannot  be  demo- 
cratic unless  its  control  is  democratic.  This  leads  to  the 
crux  of  the  present  problem  in  education :  Is  federal  control  ot 
education  democratic?  How  far  may  we  expect  federal  direc- 
tion and  stimulation  of  education  to  operate  in  the  interests 
of  democracy  ?  The  answer  to  these  questions  is  of  basic  im- 
portance in  arriving  at  a  critical  estimate  of  the  present  tide 
of  federal  legislation. 

The  federalization  tendency  is  widespread.  In  the  lan- 
guage of  Professor  Smith,  "Today  there  is  scarcely  a  phase  of 
our  business  life  where  indirect  governmental  regulation  or 
direct  governmental  "control  is  not  evident."^®*  Our  next  step, 
he  maintains,  should  be  to  centralize  educational  control  in 


»»Kerby,   William  J.,    The   Catholic   World.   May,   1920. 

i«Bryce,  James,  op.   cit..   Vol.   I,  p.  78. 

^••Smith,  W.   R.,  An  Introduction  to  Educational  Sociology,  Boston,  1917,  p.  102. 


66  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

the  federal  government,  "so  that  we  can  mobilize  our  educa- 
tional forces  and  make  an  efficient  education  a  universal  dem- 
ocratic birthright. "^^^ 

The  assumption  that  underlies  this  contention  is  that  edu- 
cational progress  in  a  democracy  bears  an  intimate  depend- 
ence upon  federal  control.  In  other  words,  the  theory  seems 
to  be  that  social  progress  demands  a  maximum  of  control  from 
above.  Cubberley  grants  that  the  "new  period  of  advance 
which  we  now  seem  to  be  entering  bids  fair  to  be  very  pa- 
ternalistic, perhaps  even  socialistic  in  the  matter  of  educa- 
tion   Each  year  the  child  is  coming  to  belong  more 

and  more  to  the  State,  and  less  and  less  to  the  parent. "^^- 

It  is  undoubtedly  true  that  there  are  conditions  which 
warrant  State  or  even  federal  intervention.  Society  func- 
tioning through  its  strongest  mode  must  protect  its  individual 
members  from  abuses  which  militate  against  their  natural 
rights  and  cannot  be  otherwise  remedied.  But  while  it  may 
be  admitted  that  the  government  in  default  of  local  action 
may  step  in  to  correct  certain  abuses  that  endanger  either 
individual  rights  or  the  public  welfare,  it  is  intolerable  that 
its  intervention  should  exceed  the  minimum  of  necessary  co- 
operation.   What  we  need  is  less  paternalism,  not  more  of  it. 

Evidently  every  effort  should  be  made  to  strengthen  the 
States  and  local  communities.  Possibly  some  degree  of  fed- 
eral aid  will  be  required.  Perhaps,  as  Professor  Judd  says, 
equalization  of  opportunity  or  equalization  of  teacher  training 
will  call  for  federal  funds,  but  the  American  way  of  reach- 
ing this  conclusion  is  by  growing  up  to  that  policy. ^^^  It  is 
fatal  to  democracy  to  resort  to  short-cut  programs  of  reform ; 
however,  expedient  and  attractive  they  may  at  first  appear, 
they  tend  ultimately  to  be  subversive  of  the  democratic  ideals 
they  were  designed  to  foster.  Coercive  policies  in  social  life 
should  always  be  a  last  resort,  and  should  prevail  only  in 
default  of  all  other  resources.  In  matters  educational,  this 
principle  deserves  especial  emphasis.  As  Horace  Mann  right- 
ly declared,  "the  education  of  the  whole  people,  in  a  repub- 
lican government,  can  never  be  attained  without  the  con- 
sent of  the  whole  people.  Compulsion,  even  though  it  were  a 
desirable,  is  not  an  available  instrument.  Enlightenment, 
not  coercion,  is  our  resource.  The  nature  of  education  must 
be  explained.  The  whole  mass  of  mind  must  be  instructed  in 
regard  to  its  comprehensive  and  enduring  interests.  We  can- 
not drive  our  people  up  a  dark  avenue,  even  though  it  be  the 

"^Smith,  W    R.,  Papers  and  Proceedings,  American  Sociological  Society,  Vol.   XIV, 

Chicago',  1919,  p.  151. 
"^Cubberley,    E.    V., Changing  Conceptions  of  Education,   Boston,  pp.   62-63. 
^^^The  Educational  Record,  Vol.  I,  No,  3. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  67 

right  one;  but  we  must  hang  the  starry  lights  of  knowledge 
about  it,  and  show  them  not  only  the  directness  of  its  course 
to  the  goal  of  prosperity  and  honor,  but  the  beauty  of  the 
way  that  leads  to  it."^^* 

In  American  life  today,  legislation  has  become  almost  a 
passion.  The  feeling  exists  that  Congress  can  cure  any  and 
all  ills  by  legislative  fiat.  Herein  lies  a  serious  danger  to 
democracy.  If  we  are  to  avoid  paternalism  and  bureaucracy, 
our  appeal  must  be  to  voluntary  co-operation  and  local  initia- 
tive rather  than  to  excessive  legislation. 

The  example  of  the  school  system  of  France  and  Prussia 
should  confirm  our  faith  in  democratic  procedures.  To  rem- 
edy an  evil  in  either  of  those  countries,  "the  minister  of  edu- 
cation would  consult  his  official  advisers,  and  call  the 
leading  experts  to  his  council ;  in  a  few  weeks  an  order  would 
issue  prescribing  for  the  schools  a  new  and  reformed  pro- 
cedure. In  this  way  Lehrplane  and  Lehraufgaber  for  the 
higher  schools  of  Prussia  were  issued  in  1882,  and  again  in 
1892.  Similarly  in  1890  the  existing  Plan  d'Etudes  et  Pro- 
grammes of  the  secondary  schools  were  promulgated.  In  this 
country,  however,  where  no  central  educational  administration 
exists,  and  where  bureaucracy  is  not  popular,  educational  re- 
forms can  be  brought  about  only  by  persuasion  and  co-opera- 
tion, for  no  official  and  no  institution  is  empowered  to  dictate 
to  us.  The  press,  the  platform,  the  teachers'  meeting  must 
be  availed  of  to  put  forward  new  ideas ;  and  men  and  women 
in  large  numbers  must  be  reasoned  with  and  convinced  in 
order  to  secure  their  acceptance. "^^^ 

The  superiority  of  the  American  policy  was  well  attested 
to  some  years  ago  by  an  eminent  German  schoolmaster.  Con- 
trasting the  German  schools  with  the  American,  he  said :  "We 
have  no  bad  schools  because  all  our  schools  are  controlled 
from  above.  You  in  America  have  all  kinds  from  the  very 
worst  to  the  very  best.  You  have  the  advantage  over  us,  on 
the  whole,  because  some  day  you  will  be  led  by  the  examples 
of  your  excellent  schools  to  a  general  improvement."^*®  As 
Professor  Judd  well  remarks,  this  is  the  view  of  an  observer 
of  democracy  who  is  not  deceived  by  the  apparent  excel- 
lences of  an  artificial  system. "^^'^ 

In  the  long  run,  very  little  can  be  said  in  defense  of  cen- 
tralized control.  It  may,  to  be  sure,  help  to  apply  the  collec- 
tive wisdom  of  the  larger  administrative  area  to  the  local  area ; 

»"Mann,   Horace,   Lectures  on  Education,   Boston,   1855,  p.   259. 

'«Butler,  N.   M.,  The  Meaning  of  Education,  New  York,  1898,  pp.  188-189. 

^••Quoted   by  Judd,  C.   H.,    The  Evolution  of  a  Democratic  School  System,   Boston, 

1918,  pp.  31-32. 
^Ibid. 


68  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

and  it  may  insure  at  least  a  minimum  level  of  cultural  uni- 
formity. In  addition,  it  may  lead  to  the  introduction  of  the 
educational  expert,  and  make  possible  the  substitution  of  care- 
fully planned  and  co-ordinated  policies  for  the  vagaries  of 
local  administration.^®® 

The  advantages  of  centralized  control,  however,  are  de- 
cidedly outweighed  by  its  disadvantages.  In  the  first  place  cen- 
tralized control  curbs  local  initiative,  and  wherever  it  pre- 
vails, education  tends  to  ossify.  It  is  a  direct  attack  upon  the 
principle  of  home  rule  and  involves  consequent  diminution  o^ 
popular  interest  in  education.  Secondly,  it  is  not  responsive 
to  local  sentiment.  It  is  remote  from  the  people  affected,  and 
its  operation  tends  to  become  paternalistic  and  bureaucratic. 
Thirdly,  it  lacks  flexibility  and  adaptability.  Its  application 
soon  becomes  mechanical  and  routinelike.  Fourthly,  it  loses 
sight  of  the  supreme  values  of  individuality.  As  Ross  says, 
"its  semi-military  organization  of  little  children,  its  overrid- 
ing of  individual  bent  and  preference,  its  appeal  to  head  in- 
stead of  heart,  its  rational  morality,  its  colorless  and  jejune 
text-books,  its  official  cult  of  ethical  and  civic  principles,  its 
cold-blooded  fostering  of  patriotism,  is  far  from  attractive."^®" 

The  wisdom  of  avoiding  undue  centralization  has  been 
ably  pointed  out  by  Bryce:  "Democracy  needs  local  self- 
government  as  its  foundation.  That  is  the  school  in  which  the 
citizen  acquires  the  habit  of  independent  action,  learns  what 
is  his  duty  to  the  State,  and  learns  also  how  to  discharge  it. 
The  control  of  local  affairs  by  the  Central  Government  has  in 
France  lessened  the  citizen's  sense  of  responsibility.  It  has 
multiplied  the  posts  of  which  the  executive  can  dispose,  and 
thereby  enlarged  the  field  in  which  political  patronage  can 
run  riot.  Patronage  may  no  doubt  be  employed  and  abused 
by  local  authorities  also,  and  is  so  employed  in  America  and 
elsewhere  for  personal  or  party  ends.  But  this  does  less  harm 
to  the  higher  interests  of  the  State,  for  the  field  of  action  is 
narrower,  and  the  malady  may  be  only  sporadic,  curable  by 
the  action  of  local  citizens  themselves  when  they  have  been 
roused  to  a  sense  of  its  evils,  as  it  is  being  cured  today  in  the 
United  States.""^ 

Referring  to  the  experience  of  modern  democracies  in  con- 
trolling education,  Bryce  continues:  "Elementary  education 
is  a  branch  of  administration  assigned  in  some  countries  to  a 
central,  in  others  to  a  local  authority.  The  argument  for  giv- 
ing it  to  the  latter  is  strong  because  the  interest  of  parents  in 


»«*Sneddon,  C'avid,  Problems  of  Educational  Readjustment,  Boston,  1913,  pp.  236-237. 
"•Ross,  E.  A.,  Social  Control,  New  York,  1901.  p.  178. 
""Bryce,  James,  Modern  Democracies,  Vol.   I,  pp.   320-321. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  69 

the  instruction  of  their  children  ought  to  be  stimulated  by  the 
function  of  choosing  the  local  school  authority  as  well  as  by 
the  right  of  representing  to  it  any  local  need  or  grievance. 
This  function  they  have  enjoyed  in  the  United  States,  Can- 
ada, and  New  Zealand,  as  well  as  in  Switzerland  and  Great 
Britain,  but  to  a  much  smaller  extent  in  France,  Australia, 
and  Ireland.  Reformers,  impatient  with  the  slackness  and 
parsimony  common  among  local  authorities,  have,  however, 
been  everywhere  advocating  State  intervention,  insisting  that 
the  reluctance  of  the  local  citizen  to  spend  freely  makes  it  nec- 
essary to  invoke  the  central  government,  both  to  supervise 
schools  and  to  grant  the  money  from  the  national  treasury  for 
the  salaries  of  teachers  and  the  various  educational  appliances. 
Here,  as  is  often  the  case,  the  choice  is  between  more  rapid 
progress  on  the  one  hand  and  the  greater  solidity  and  hold 
upon  the  average  citizen's  mind  which  institutions  draw  from 
being  entrusted  to  popular  management."^^^ 

Accompanying  the  demand  for  centralized  control  is  the 
demand  for  the  exclusive  State  school.  Professor  Sharp  in- 
sists that  we  must  have  a  common  school  for  all  the  people, 
and  that  all  must  attend  a  common  school ;  the  private  school 
in  a  democratic  system  is  "un-American  and  anti-American 
and  no  substitute  at  all  for  the  common  public  school.  All 
true  forces  of  democracy  are  centripetal,  getting  together 
forces."^^2 

That  this  demand  consists  of  more  than  mere  words  was 
well  borne  out  in  the  Michigan  election  of  November,  1920, 
when  there  was  submitted  to  the  electorate  a  proposed  amend- 
ment to  the  State  Constitution  requiring  that  all  residents  of 
the  State  of  Michigan  between  the  ages  of  five  and  sixteen 
years  attend  the  public  school  in  their  respective  districts  un- 
til they  have  graduated  from  the  eighth  grade.  While  the 
amendment  was  lost,  it  nevertheless  goes  to  serve  as  a  strik- 
ing example  of  the  present  trend  of  educational  legislation. 

Neither  the  State  nor  the  Federal  Government  has  any 
right  to  a  monopoly  of  education  or  to  empire  over  the  minds 
of  men.  To  quote  John  Stuart  Mill:  "One  thing  must  be 
strenuously  insisted  on;  that  the  government  must  claim  no 
monopoly  for  its  education,  either  in  the  lower  or  in  the  higher 
branches;  must  exert  neither  authority  nor  influence  to  in- 
duce the  people  to  resort  to  its   teachers  in   preference  to 

others it  is  not  endurable  that  a  government  should 

either  de  jure  or  de  facfo,  have  a  complete  control  over  the 
education  of  the  people.     To  possess  such  a  control,  and  ac- 

"»Bryce,  James,  op.   cit..  Vol.  II,  pp.  436-7. 

"'Sharp,   Dallas   Lore,   Patrons  of  Democracy,   Boston,   1919,  pp.   8  and  26. 


70  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

tually  exert  it,  is  to  be  despotic.  A  government  which  can 
mould  the  opinions  and  sentiments  of  the  people  from  their 

youth  upwards,  can  do  with  them  whatever  it  pleases 

It  would  be  justified  in  requiring  from  all  the  people  that 
they  possess  instruction  in  certain  things,  but  not  in  pre- 
scribing to  them  how  or  from  whom  they  shall  obtain  it."*^' 

The  State  or  nation  therefore  should  not  ordain  that  it§ 
schools  be  exclusive.  According  to  U.  S.  Commissioner  Clax- 
ton,  perfect  freedom  in  the  establishment  and  maintenance  of 
schools  and  in  sending  children  to  other  than  public  schools 
is  in  thorough  accord  with  the  principles  of  American  democ- 
racy, and  should  be  maintained. ^^*  Hanus  likewise  holds  that 
the  provisions  of  private  enterprise  or  private  generosity  for 
education  are  to  be  regarded  with  favor  by  a  democratic 
society.^^^ 

Neither  centralization  nor  governmental  monopoly  of 
schools  is  essential  to  social  solidarity.  The  forces  that  make 
for  a  healthy  social  organism  are  internal  and  spiritual  rather 
than  external  and  legislative.  Coercion  may  prove  effective, 
but  it  is  not  the  instrument  of  a  free  people.  As  Kerschen- 
steiner  well  says,  "if  the  feeling  of  nationality  is  alive  among 
a  people,  unifying  forces  appear  of  themselves,  without  com- 
pulsion from  any  central  authority,  even  in  decentralized  gov- 
ernmental functions."^^®  Accordingly,  he  adds,  the  States  are 
to  be  praised  for  their  jealous  insistence  upon  their  sovereign- 
ty in  education ;  "nothing  is  more  dangerous  for  the  schools 
than  an  all-inclusive  system  that  reaches  out  over  broad 
domains,  having  no  regard  for  territorial  interests,  much  less 
for  purely  local  demands.""^ 

While  conspicuous  differences  exist  among  the  various 
State  systems,  it  is  not  a  phenomenon  to  be  entirely  deplored. 
In  the  first  place,  the  desirability^  of  uniformity  among  the 
States  is  indeed  questionable.  In  the  words  of  Senator  King, 
uniformity  does  not  necessarily  mean  advancement ;  the  law 
of  progress  is  correlated  with  the  law  of  variation.^^^  The 
same  theme  is  stressed  by  John  Dewey  in  the  volume,  "De- 
mocracy and  Education,"  in  which  he  declares  that  "a  progres- 
sive society  counts  individual  variations  as  precious  since  it 
finds  in  them  the  means  of  its  own  growth.  Hence  a  demo- 
cratic society  must  in  consistency  with  its  ideal,  allow   for 

"•Mill,    John    Stuart,    Principles    of   Political    Economy,    New    York,    1889,    Vol.    II, 

pp.    676-577. 
^■>*School  Life,   Vol.   V,   No.   9,   Nov.    1,   1920. 

^^^Hanus,  Paul  H.,  School  Administration  and  School  Reports,  Boston,  1920,  p.  155. 
"8U.  S.  Bureau  of  Education.  Bulletin,  1913,  No.  24,  p.  5. 

"•r/i^  Congressional  Record,  May  22,  1920. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  71 

intellectual  freedom  and  the  play  of  diverse  gifts  and  interests 
in  its  educational  measures. "^^^ 

The  presumption,  therefore,  in  a  healthy  democracy  is 
always  against  the  intervention  of  the  government.  While 
society  through  the  government  has  the  right  to  maintain 
itself  and  take  such  steps  as  are  essential  to  its  perpetuity,  its 
right  is  a  restricted  one,  and  is  limited  to  the  minimum  of 
necessary  co-operation.  Aware  of  the  bitter  historic  struggle 
between  the  freedom  of  the  individual  and  the  supremacy  of 
the  State,  and  keenly  conscious  of  the  tendency  of  govern- 
ment to  encroach  upon  the  individual,  modern  democracy  is 
fearful  and  distrustful  of  authority.  From  this  point  of  view 
democracy  is  not  merely  an  aspiration,  but  it  is  a  stirring 
protest  against  the  curb  of  autocratic  or  bureaucratic  aggres- 
sion. 

To  offset  the  possible  excess  of  governmental  control  and 
dominion,  the  other  social  agencies  must  act  as  a  balance. 
In  this  way  the  home,  the  church,  the  school,  the  press,  and 
the  various  civic  and  cultural  groups  may  perform  an  im- 
portant function,  namely,  that  of  preserving  the  social  equili- 
brium. If  they  prove  vigilant  and  active,  the  fate  of  our  free 
institutions  will  not  depend  upon  the  inclination  of  State  or 
government.  Thus,  diffusion  of  control  becomes  the  chief  se- 
curity against  its  excess. ^^° 

At  this  point  it  should  be  insisted  that  of  all  institutions 
the  home  especially  should  be  faithful  to  its  sacred  duty.  The 
family,  says  Cope,  is  the  first  and  most  effective  school  of 
democracy.^^^  It  is,  moreover,  the  chief  agency  in  the  edu- 
cation of  the  young  and  as  such  it  ought  never  to  be  super- 
seded.^^^  Unfortunately,  however,  it  is  frequently  neglectful 
of  its  trust,  with  the  inevitable  consequence  that  in  justice  to 
the  children,  the  State  or  Federal  Government  is  obliged  to 
step  in  and  fulfill  the  duties  in  the  performance  of  which  the 
home  has  been  derelict. 

The  strengthening  of  the  home  is  one  of  the  greatest  so- 
cial problems  of  the  present.  Its  deficiencies  have  necessitated 
the  government  to  go  far  in  the  direction  of  paternalism.  To 
restore  the  balance  presents  a  task  that  is  well-nigh  heroic. 
One  thing,  however,  should  be  remembered :  Whenever  the 
State  or  Federal  Government  concerns  itself  with  the  indi- 


"•Dewey,    John,   Democracy   and  Education,    New   York,    1916,   p.    357. 
^«>Ross,   E.  A..  Social  Control,  New  York,  1901,  p.  431, 
"'Cope,   H.    F.,  Education  for  Democracy,  New  York,  1920,  p.   108. 
i*sShields,  T.   E.,  Philosophy   of  Education,   Washington,  1917,  p.  281. 


72  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

vidual  child,  it  should  deal  with  him  as  a  member  of  the  family 
and  through  the  family;  whenever  this  principle  is  ignored, 
the  natural  result  is  the  weakening  and  disintegration  of  the 
family,  which  in  turn  works  serious  injury  to  the  individual 
and  to  society.^®* 


Conclusion 

The  following  conclusions  may  be  drawn  from  this  dis- 
sertation : 

I.  While  national  interest  in  education  is  not  without  a 
long  evolution,  the  nation  is  at  present  assuming  an  increas- 
ingly important  role  in  relation  to  education.  The  truth  of 
this  is  evident  upon  an  examination  of  the  large  number  of 
education  bills  now  pending  in  Congress. 

II.  The  bills  pending  in  Congress  during  the  66th  and 
67th  Congresses  have  been  designed  to  serve  a  wide  variety 
of  purposes;  bills  have  been  introduced  for  such  diverse  ob- 
jects as  the  following:  Americanization,  physical  education, 
vocational  education  and  rehabilitation  of  ex-soldiers;  rural 
and  mountain  schools ;  civic,  social,  and  health  extension  edur 
cation;  a  national  school  of  correspondence;  instruction  in  the 
hygiene  of  maternity  and  infancy  ;^^*  also  bills  to  create  a  De- 
partment of  Education,  to  establish  a  National  University,  a 
National  Conservatory  of  Music,  a  station  for  the  investiga- 
tion of  mentally  handicapped  children ;  likewise  bills  to  set 
up  a  commission  to  investigate  public  education  in  the  United 
States  and  to  make  recommendations  for  its  improvement, 
and  finally,  a  large  number  of  measures  affecting  the  scope 
and  status  of  the  work  carried  on  by  the  United  States  Bureau 
of  Education. 

III.  Many  of  these  measures,  if  enacted,  would  exercise 
a  far-reaching  influence  on  the  schools  of  the  nation.  Taken 
altogether,  they  clearly  reveal  the  tendency  to  transfer  the 
educational  burdens  of  the  States  to  the  nation.  If  American 
education  is  to  remain  true  to  its  democratic  traditions,  edu- 
cational control  will  be  kept  as  far  as  practicable  in  the  hands 
of  the  people.  As  already  pointed  out,  the  experience  of 
France  under  centralized  control  gives  ample  evidence  of  the 
waning  of  local  interest  in  education  wlien  control  passes  from 
the  local  communities  to  the  nation.    In  a  democracy,  a  super- 


***This    (Sheppard-Towner)   bill  was  passed  in  the  course   of  the  67th  Congress,   1st 
Session. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  73 

imposed  system  should  be  avoided.  There  are  no  reasons 
which  justify  the  extension  of  federal  control  of  education  in 
the  United  States. 

IV.  Several  important  bills  now  pending  embody  the  so- 
called  fifty-fifty  principle  of  federal  subsidy.  While  this  prin- 
ciple is  not  to  be  absolutely  discountenanced,  experience  does 
not  justify  its  rapid  extension  along  educational  lines.  It  is 
still  on  trial,  and  unless  it  is  followed  up  by  a  program  of  rigid 
supervision,  it  may  give  rise  to  serious  abuses.  In  some 
countries  it  has  been  employed  for  political  ends  by  the  dom- 
inant party. 

V.  The  Sterling-Towner  Bill  is  the  most  important  of 
the  educational  measures  now  pending  in  Congress.  While 
it  represents  a  sincere  effort  to  remedy  a  number  of  educa- 
tional deficiencies  that  are  clearly  obvious  and  deserve  cor- 
rection, its  modus  operandi  is  open  to  challenge.  A  genuine 
difficulty  lies  in  the  danger  that  the  appropriation  feature  of 
the  bill  will  ultimately  bring  about  a  policy  of  federal  con- 
trol of  education.  The  policy  of  the  Federal  Government  un- 
der present  legislation  lends  substance  to  this  contention.  In 
addition,  the  bill  reveals  many  of  the  shortcomings  of  a  com- 
promise measure ;  in  some  respects  it  is  neither  well  studied 
nor  consistent.  Conceivably  the  bill  might  afford  temporary 
relief  in  some  quarters;  in  the  long  run,  however,  its  opera- 
tion would  prove  harmful  and  it  would  commit  the  country 
to  an  educational  policy  that  would  defeat  rather  than  pro- 
mote the  best  interests  of  the  nation.  The  experience  of  for- 
eign governments  with  nationally  controlled  and  subsidized 
education  does  not  argue  favorably  for  the  adoption  of  such 
a  plan  in  America. 

VI.  Among  a  democratic  people,  leadership  rather  than 
law  should  be  the  chief  inspiration  of  educational  reform. 
Federal  control  is  advisable  only  under  the  condition  of  ab- 
solute necessity  and  as  a  result  of  a  thorough  investigation 
of  the  evils  to  be  remedied.  Since  the  end  of  the  war,  the 
States  have  been  taking  the  initiative  for  educational  progress. 
This  tendency  on  the  part  of  the  States  is  so  general  in  ex- 
tent, and  so  salutary  in  principle,  that  it  should  give  pause  to 
any  precipitant  legislation  by  the  National  Congress.  At  all 
events,  the  Federal  Government  should  avoid  overlapping  the 
activities  of  the  States. 

As  a  result  of  the  general  election  in  November,  1920, 
important  constitutional  amendments  in  the  interest  of  edu- 
cation were  adopted  in  many  States.  California,  Georgia, 
Texas,  Utah  and  Virginia  were  vitally  affected.^^^     In  the 

^*^School  Life.  Vol.   V,  No.   10. 


74  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

course  of  an  intensive  school  campaign  in  Texas,  public  opin- 
ion was  educated  concerning  the  educational  needs  of  the 
State,  with  the  result  that  favorable  legislation  comprising 
fifteen  progressive  features  was  enacted/^^  Alabama  likewise 
reports  progressive  action/^^  and  twenty-two  other  States 
contemplate  educational  programs  at  the  approaching  ses- 
sions of  their  respective  legislatures/*® 

This  activity  is  a  direct  answer  to  the  challenge  that  the 
States  are  incapable  of  meeting  their  educational  responsi- 
bilities, and  that  their  educational  sovereignty  should  be 
transferred  in  whole  or  part  to  the  Federal  Government. 
Moreover,  it  lends  corroboration  to  the  testimony  of  Ayres 
that  "the  educational  effort  of  a  State  is  dependent  on  its  aspir- 
ations and  ideals  rather  than  on  its  financial  resources.  The 
handicap  of  limited  resources  is  relative  rather  than  abso- 
lute."^*^  Therefore,  on  the  basis  of  data  at  present  available, 
the  utter  incapacity  of  the  States  to  meet  the  emergency  in 
education  has  not  been  demonstrated. 

In  general,  considerable  progress  is  being  made  through- 
out the  Union.  A  healthy  sign  is  found  in  the  advance  returns 
of  the  decennial  census  for  1920,  which  show  that  despite  the 
large  immigration  of  illiterates  during  the  preceding  decade, 
the  percentage  of  national  illiteracy  is  steadily  decreasing. 

VII.  In  many  quarters  the  belief  is  growing  that  the 
continuance  of  the  present  centripetal  drift  in  educational  con- 
trol may  be  rightly  construed  as  a  decline  of  American  faith 
in  liberty.  According  to  President  Butler,  there  has  been 
over-organization  in  education  for  a  long  time  past.  "Too 
many  persons  are  engaged  in  supervising,  in  inspecting  and  in 
recording  the  work  of  other  persons.  There  is  too  much  ma- 
chinery, and  in  consequence  a  steady  temptation  to  lay  more 
stress  upon  the  form  of  education  than  upon  its  content.  Sta- 
tistics displace  scholarship.  There  are,  in  addition,  too  many 
laws  and  too  precise  laws,  and  not  enough  opportunity  for 
those  mistakes  and  failures,  due  to  individual  initiative  and 
experiment,  which  are  the  foundation  for  great  and  lasting 


^^Ibid.,  Vol.   V,  No.  9,  and  No.  12. 

^^■'Ibid.,   Vol.   VI,   No.   1. 

^^Ibid.,  Vol.  VI,  No.  2. 

**»Ayres,  Leonard  P.,  An  Index  Number  for  State  School  Systems,  New  York,  1920, 
p.   40. 

Note:  Commenting  on  educational  progress  in  Mississippi,  H.  M.  Ivy,  State  Super- 
visor of  Secondary  Schools,  writes  as  follows  in  the  Journal  of  the  N.  E.  A., 
May,  1922:  "The  sentiment  of  the  people  of  Mississippi  toward  education  is  far 
more  favorable  than  ever  before.  We  believe  that  we  are  justified  in  the 
statement  that  our  educational  efficiency  has  improved  not  less  than  twenty  per 
cent  during  the  past  three  years." 

^••Butler,  N.  M.,  Annual  Report  of  the  President,  1921,  Columbia  University, 
Bulletin  of  Information,  Jan.  1922. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  75 

VIII.  The  creation  of  a  Federal  Department  of  Educa- 
tion is  gaining  support  throughout  the  country.  Realizing  the 
baneful  influence  of  politics  on  education,  many  prefer  a  Fed- 
eral Council  or  Commission  on  Education  to  a  Department  of 
Education  with  a  Secretary  in  the  President's  Cabinet. 

Education  undoubtedly  merits  a  higher  status  in  the  gov- 
ernment. Under  existing  statutes,  the  Bureau  of  Education  is 
unable  to  cope  with  the  important  educational  problems  which 
properly  belong  to  it.  At  all  events,  education  should  not  be 
submerged  in  the  proposed  Department  of  Public  Welfare,  as 
provided  in  the  Kenyon  Bill,  S.  1607. 

IX.  In  the  interest  of  constructive  reform  the  following 
suggestions  are  submitted : 

1.  The  Federal  Government  should  take  steps  to  co-ordi- 
nate its  existing  educational  activities.  In  the  interest  of  econ- 
omy and  efficiency,  the  thirty  or  forty  educational  offices  now 
being  administered  by  the  United  States,  should,  as  far  as  pos- 
sible be  brought  into  organic  relationship  and  articulation 
with  one  another. 

2.  A  National  Council  or  Commission  on  Education 
should  be  created  by  the  Federal  Government.  This  commis- 
sion should  be  representative  in  character,  and  composed  of 
men  well  qualified  educationally  regardless  of  political  affil- 
iation. Geographical  considerations  should  bear  considerable 
weight  in  the  making  of  appointments.  In  order  to  give  con- 
tinuity to  the  commission  the  term  of  office  of  a  member 
should  be  not  less  than  seven  years,  and  appointments  should 
be  so  regulated  as  to  provide  at  least  one  appointment  and 
retirement  annually.  In  this  way,  constant  newness  as  well 
as  continuity  would  be  assured. 

Its  duty  might  well  include  the  following  functions :  (a) 
to  investigate  educational  problems  of  national  significance; 
(b)  to  authorize  studies  and  surveys  of  schools  and  school 
systems  in  various  parts  of  the  country,  to  discover  defects 
and  afford  information  toward  their  improvement ;  (c)  to  pro- 
mote the  standards  of  research  under  government  auspices; 
(d)  to  devise  objective  standards  of  educational  efficiency;  (e) 
to  furnish  leadership  and  inspiration  for  the  educational 
thought  of  the  country;  and  (f)  to  report  annually  to  Con- 
gress on  the  state  of  education  throughout  the  nation. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


CONGRESSIONAL   BILLS   AND    DOCUMENTS 


66th  Congress,  1st  Session,  S.  1017,  H.  R.  7. 
S.  561. 

H.  R.  9353. 

H.   R.   1108. 

S.  1536. 

S.  2121. 

H.  R.  3079. 

S.   2203. 

S.  2376. 

S.  819. 

H.  R.  1204. 

H.  J.  Res.  46. 
2nd        "       S.  3950,  H.  R.  12652. 

H.  R.   12269. 

S.  3315. 
67th  "        1st         "       H.  R.  25. 

H.  R.  4129. 

S.  1061. 

S.    1607 

S.   1839. 

S.  408. 

H.  R.  6959. 

H.  R.  4116. 

H.  J.  Res.  93. 

H.   R.   21. 

H.  R.  22. 

H.  R.  7,  S.  1252. 

S.  846. 
"       H.  R.  4385. 

S.  622. 

S.  523. 

H.  R.  7458. 

S.  416. 

S.  1039. 

H.  R.  9. 

H.  R.  72. 

H.    R.   2159. 

Joint  Hearings  before  the  Committee  on  Education  and  Labor, 
Congress  of  the  United  States,  66th  Congress,  1st  Session,  on  S.  1017, 
H.  R.  7,  Washington,  1920. 

Report  on  H.  R.  7,  House  of  Representatives,  Report  No.  1201. 

Hearing  before  the  Committee  on  Education  and  Labor,  U.  S.  Sen- 
ate, 66th  Congress,  2nd  Session,  on  S.  3950.    Washington,  1920. 

Hearing  before  the  Committee  on  Education,  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives, 66th  Congress,  3rd  Session,  on  H.  R.  12652.  Washington, 
1921. 

Hearing  before  the  Committee  on  Education,  House  of  Represen- 
tatives, 66th  Congress,  1st  Session,  on  H.  R.  6870.  Washington,  1919. 

Hearing  before  the  Committee  on  Education,  House  of  Represen- 
tatives, 66th  Congress,  3rd  Session,  on  H.  R.  12078.  Washington,  1921. 

76 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  'Movement  77 

Hearing  before  the  Committee  on  Education  and  Labor,  U.  S. 
Senate,  67th  Congress,  1st  Session,  on  S.  408.     Washington,  1921. 

Joint  Hearings  before  the  Committee  on  Education,  Congress  of 
the  U.  S.,  67th  Congress,  1st  Session,  on  S.  1607  and  H.  R.  5837. 
Washington,  1921.  _  ^    ^^^^^ 

House  Document  No.  1004,  63d  Congress  on  H.  R.  16952. 

Report  to  accompany  H.  R.  7951,  Co-operative  Agricultural  Exten- 
sion Work,  Report  No.  110,  63d  Congress,  2nd  Session. 

Congressional  Record,  Remarks  and  Debates  on  Education  Bills 
under  the  following  dates: 

July  28,  1919. 
Jan.  17,  1920. 
Mar.  26,  1920. 
May  22,  1920. 
Feb.   12,   1921. 

Pamphlet,  Laws  Relating  to  Vocational  Education,  Issued  by 
Document  Room,  House  of  Representatives,  Washington,  1921. 


PEDAGOGICAL 

Butler,  Nicholas  Murray,  The  Meaning  of  Education,  New  York,  1898. 

Cope,  Henry  Frederick,  Education  for  Democracy,  New  York,  1920. 

CuBBERLEY,  Ellwood  P.,  Changing  Conceptions  of  Education,  Boston,  1909. 
Public  Education  in  the  United  States,  Boston,  1919. 

Dewey,  John^  Democracy  and  Education,  New  York,  1916. 

DuTTON,  AND  Snedden,   The  Administration  of  Public  Education  in  the 
United  States,  New  York,  1914. 

Hart,  Joseph  Kinmont,  Democracy  in  Education,  New  York,  1918. 

JuDD,  Charles  H.,  The  Evolution  of  a  Democratic  School  System,  Bos- 
ton, 1918. 

Keith  and  Bagley,  The  Nation  and  the  Schools,  New  York,  1920. 

Mann,  Horace,  Lectures  on  Education,  Bostin,  1855. 

Sharp,  Dallas  Lore,  Patrons  of  Democracy,  Boston,  1919. 

Shields,  Thomas  Edward,  Philosophy  of  Education,  Washington,  1917. 

Slosson,  Edwin  E.,  The  American  Spirit  in  Education,  New  Haven,  1921. 

Snedden,  David,  Educational  Readjustment,  Boston,  1913. 
Vocational  Education,  New  York,  1920. 

PHILOSOPHICAL  AND  SOCIAL 

Bryce,  James,  Modern  Democracies,  New  York,  1921. 
Chancellor,  William  E.,  Educational  Sociology,  New  York,  1919. 
Hadley,  Arthur  T.,  The  Moral  Basis  of  Democracy,  New  Haven,  1919. 
KiRKPATRiCK,  Edwin  A.,  Fundamentals  in  Sociology,  Boston,  1916. 
Knox,  Samuel,  An  Essay    on  the    Best    System   of   Liberal   Education, 

Adapted  to  the  Genius  of  the  Government  of  the  United  States, 

Baltimore,  1799. 
Perry,  Ralph  Barton,  The  Present  Conflict  of  Ideals,  New  York,  1918. 
Ross,  Edward  Alsworth,  Social  Control,  New  York,  1901. 

What  is  America  r  New  York,  1919. 

Principles  of  Sociology,  New  York,  1920. 
Smith,  Walter  R.,  An  Introduction  to  Educational  Sociology,  Boston, 

1917. 


78  The  Federal  Government  and  Education 

ARTICLES,  PAMPHLETS  AND  REVIEWS 

Andrews,  B.  F.,  The  Land  Grant  of  1862  and  the  Land  Grant  Colleges, 
U.  S.  Bureau  of  Education,  Bulletin,  1918,  No.  13. 

Blakely,  Paul  L.,  The  Case  Against  the  Smith-Towner  Bill,  Pamphlet, 
America  Press,  New  York,  1920. 

BuRRis,  W.  P.,  AND  Bagley,  W.  C,  A  Federal  Department  of  Education 
as  set  forth  in  the  Smith-Towner  Educational  Bill,  N.  E.  A.  Leaf- 
let, Department  of  Superintendence,  Cleveland,  Ohio,  Feb.  26, 
1920. 

Butler,  N.  M,,  Is  America  Worth  Saving?  Address,  Cincinnati,  Ohio, 
April  19,  1919. 

Capen,  S.  p..  Arguments  Against  the  Smith-Towner  Bill,  Educational 
Review,  Vol.  60,  No.  4,  Nov.,  1920. 

The    Government    and   Education,    Educational    Review,   Vol.    62, 
No.  2,  Sept.,  1921. 

Germann,  George  B.,  National  Legislation  Concerning  Education,  Co- 
lumbia University  Thesis,  New  York,  1899. 

Guthrie,  William  D.,  The  Federal  Government  and  Education,  Cath- 
olic Educational  Association  Bulletin,  Vol.  XVI,  No.  4,  August, 
1920. 

Hood,  William  R.,  Review  of  Educational  Legislation  1917  and  1918, 
U.  S.  Bur.  Ed.,  Bulletin,  1919,  No.  13. 

James,  Edmund  L.,  The  ConstsHutionality  of  a  National  University,  An- 
nual Report,  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Education,  1898-99,  Vol.  I. 

Kerby,  William  J.,  Social  Aspects  of  Rights  and  Obligations,  The  Cath- 
olic World,  Vol.   CXI,   No.  662,   May,   1920. 

Kerschensteiner,  George,  A  Comparison  of  Public  Education  in  Germany 
and  in  the  United  States,  U.  S.  Bur.  Ed.  Bulletin,  1913,  No.  24. 

Magill,  Hugh  S.,  The  Smith-Towner  Bill,  N.  E.  A.  Leaflet,  Legislative 
Commission  Series,  No.  1,  Washington,  1920. 
The    Smith-Towner    Bill,    Educational    Review,    Vol.    60,    No.    4, 
Nov.,  1920. 

Education    and    the    Federal    Government,    School    and    Society, 
Vol.  XIV,  No.  354,  Oct.  8,  1921. 

Mann,  C.  R.,  The  American  Spirit  in  Education,  U.  S.  Bur.  Ed.  Bulle- 
tin, 1919,  No.  30. 

The   National    Organisation    of   Education,    Educational    Review, 
Vol.  60,  No.  4,  Nov.,  1920. 

Monroe,  Paul,  Ed.,  Article,  National  University,  Cyclopedia  of  Educa- 
tion, N.  Y.,  1913. 

Russell,  James  Earl,  Education  for  Democracy,  Teachers  College  Rec- 
ord, Vol.  XIX,  May,  1918. 

Ryan,  John  A.,  Vocational  Education  in  a  Democratic  Society,  The  Cath- 
olic Educational  Association  Bulletin,  Vol.  XVI,  No.  2,  Proceed- 
ings and  Addresses  of  the  Sixteenth  Annual  Meeting,  St.  Louis, 
1919. 

Spaulding,  F.  E.,  Educating  the  Nation,  The  Atlantic  Monthly,  April,  1920. 

Steiner,  Bernard  C,  Life  of  Henry  Barnard,  U.  S.  Bur.  Ed.  Bulletin 
1919,  No.  8. 

Strayer,  George  D.,  Why  the  Smith-Towner  Bill  Should  Becomg  a  Law, 
Educational   Review,   Vol.  60,    No.  4,   Nov.,    1920. 


An  Examination  of  the  Federalization  Movement  79 

VARIA 

American  Council  on  Education,  Arguments  Submitted  in  Connection  with 
a  Referendum  on  Proposed  Federal  Legislation  Promding  for 
the  Creation  of  a  Department  of  Education  and  Federal  Aid  for 
Education,   Washington. 

American  Sociological  Society,  Papers  and  Proceedings,  Fourteenth  An- 
nual Meeting,  Vol.  XIV,  The  Problem  of  Democracy. 

Americanization  as  a  War  Measure,  U.  S.  Bur.  Ed.  Bulletin,  1918,  No.  18. 

Federal  Board  for  Vocational  Education,  Second  Annual  Report,  Wash- 
ington, 1918. 
Bulletin  No.  1,  Statement  of  Policies,  Washington,  1917. 

Memorandum  to  the  Hon.  Alfred  E.  Smith,  Governor  of  New  York,  sub- 
mitted by  Dr.  Augustus  S.  Downing,  Assistant  Commissioner 
of  Education  of  New  York,  after  conference  with  President  John 
H.  Finley  of  the  University  of  the  State  of  New  York  and  the 
State  Department  of  Education,  Albany,  June  19,  1919. 

National  Catholic  Welfare  Council,  Statement  on  the  Smith-Towner  Bill. 

Proceedings  Americanization  Conference,  Washington,  Government  Print- 
ing Office,  1919. 

School  Life,  Bi-monthly  publication  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Education,  Vol.  V, 
Nos.  9,  10  and  12,  Vol.  VI,  Nos.  1  and  2. 

University  of  Illinois  Bulletin,  Vol.  XIX,  No.  23.  The  Relation  of  the 
Federal  Government  to  Education.     Urbana,  111.,  1922. 


VITA 

The  writer  of  this  dissertation  was  born  in  Norwich,  Con- 
necticut, July  3,  1895.  He  made  his  early  studies  at  St.  Pat- 
rick's Parochial  School  and  the  Norwich  Free  Academy  in  that 
city.  In  1913,  he  matriculated  at  the  College  of  the  Holy 
Cross,  Worcester,  Massachusetts,  and  received  the  degree 
Bachelor  of  Arts  from  that  institution  in  1917.  In  September, 
1917,  he  entered  upon  graduate  work  in  the  School  of  Phil- 
osophy of  the  Catholic  University  of  America  as  a  Fellow  of 
the  Knights  of  Columbus,  and  in  June,  1918,  received  the  de- 
gree of  Master  of  Arts  in  Education. 

After  a  year  spent  in  the  military  service  of  the  United 
States  as  an  instructor  in  rehabilitation  hospitals,  he  resumed 
his  graduate  studies  in  Education  as  a  candidate  for  the  de- 
gree, Doctor  of  Philosophy.  As  minors,  the  following 
branches  were  pursued:  Sociology,  Social  Psychology,  Bi- 
ology, and  American  History. 

The  writer  takes  this  opportunity  to  acknowledge  his  deep 
debt  of  gratitude  to  the  late  Reverend  Doctor  Thomas  Ed- 
ward Shields,  under  whose  scholarly  guidance  his  graduate 
work  was  carried  on  until  the  Doctor's  death  in  1921 ;  to  the 
Reverend  Dr.  Patrick  J.  McCormick  for  frequent  counsel  and 
direction  as  teacher  for  two  years,  and  as  Major  Professor 
during  the  concluding  period  of  the  writer's  university  work; 
also  to  the  Rt.  Rev.  Mgr.  Pace,  Rev.  Dr.  Kerby,  Rev.  Father 
McVay,  Dr.  McCarthy,  and  Dr.  Parker,  whose  classes  it  was 
his  privilege  to  attend.  He  wishes  finally  to  express  his  sin- 
cere thanks  to  the  Knights  of  Columbus  for  the  exceptional 
advantages  enjoyed  for  three  years  as  a  graduate  student  at 
the  Catholic  University. 


80 


FOURTEEN  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 


This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 

Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


3Jan'36TWy 


1956  LU 


?30d'56?W 


REC'D  LP 


OCT  17  1956 


7VJ\at'5»<i^ 


RSC'D  LP 


JUN101958 


2OOct'6}0iJ 


pec 


D  t-o 


m 


Wm 


LD  21-100m-2,'55 

(B139s22)476 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


